BIMALENDU KUMAR CHATTERJEE Vs. REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER CENTRAL
LAWS(JHAR)-2009-7-7
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on July 24,2009

BIMALENDU KUMAR CHATTERJEE Appellant
VERSUS
REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), DHANBAD Respondents

JUDGEMENT

D.G.R.PATNAIK, J - (1.) Petitioner in this writ application, has prayed for quashing of the order dated February 21, 2007 (Annexure-3) passed by the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central) Dhanbad (respondent No. 2) in Application No. 36/22/2006.E.6, whereby the petitioner's claim for interest on gratuity amount, has been rejected. A further prayer has been made for quashing the order dated September 27, 2007 (Annexure-5) passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Dhanbad (respondent No. 1) in Case No. PG Appeal/(16).2007, whereby the petitioner's appeal preferred against the order of the Assistant Labour Commissioner, was dismissed.
(2.) Questions raised in this writ application, are as follows; 1. Whether the impugned orders are wholly unlawful, unjust, improper and without authority of law? 2. Whether the respondent nos. 1 and 2 are justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner for interest due to nonpayment of gratuity in time in violation of mandatory provisions of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act and Rules framed thereunder? 3. Whether the plea of retention of quarter is misconceived and misleading and could have been accepted as a ground for rejection of the petitioner's claim for payment of statutory interest on the gratuity? 4. Whether non-payment of interest on the gratuity is violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India?
(3.) The facts of the petitioner's case, stated briefly, are as follows: The petitioner was a permanent employee of the respondent BCCL and after completing 33 years 5 months in service, he retired on February 28, 2005 from the post of Accounts Assistant while posted in the Central Hospital, Dhanbad under the respondent no. 3. The petitioner was expecting payment of his gratuity amount along with his retiral dues, but the same was not paid promptly and after a lapse of more than nine months from the date of his retirement, on December 1, 2005 he was given two cheques amounting to Rs. 2,89,808/-, though the cheques were drawn in the month of July 2005 and November 2005 respectively. About seven months thereafter, on July 4, 2006, a further sum of Rs. 10,404/-being the balance amount of gratuity, was paid to him.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.