✦ High Court of India

 Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Registered Office- 5, Bentinck Street Kolkata- 700001 (West Bengal) v. 1. Pratap Lodhi S/o Late

Case Details

1 2025:CGHC:27553 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 116 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Registered Office- 5, Bentinck Street Kolkata- 700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, Bistrict Durg (C.G.)- 491009, Through Authrorized Authority Sudhir Joshi Son Of Late Shri Madhukar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.)- 491009 --- Petitioner(s) versus 1. Pratap Lodhi S/o Late Shri Samrat Aged About 59 Years R/o Village And Post- Rasmada, District- Durg (C.G.) 2. Shri Padmini Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd, Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. 3. The Controlling Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WITH WPL No. 126 of 2025

Legal Reasoning

 Jai Balaji Industries Limited Registered Office-5, Bentinck Street Kolkata-700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, District Durg Chhattisgarh 491009, Through Authorized Authority Sudhir Joshi, S/o Late Shri Mudhakar Joshi Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada District Durg Chhattisgarh491009 ---Petitioner(s) 2 Versus 1. Ram Narayan Soni S/o Shri Firtu Soni Aged About 53 Years R/o Village And Post Rasmada, District Durg Chhattisgarh 2. Shri Padmini Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd. Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg Chhattisgarh 3. The Controlling Authority Under He Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WITH WPL No. 125 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited Registered Office- 5, Bentinck Street Kolkata- 700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.)- 491009, Through Authrorized Authority Sudhir Joshi Son Of Late Shri Madhukar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.)- 491009 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Bhuneshwar Sahu S/o Shri Chaitu Ram Aged About 65 Years R/o Village And Post - Rasmada, District - Durg Chhatisgarh 2. Shri Padmini Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd, Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. 3. The Controlling Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WITH WPL No. 123 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited Registered Office- 5, Bentinck Street Kolkata- 700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.)- 491009, 3 Through Authrorized Authority Sudhir Joshi Son Of Late Shri Madhukar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.)- 491009 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Fuleshwari Yadav W/o Shri Late Shri Mujan Yadav Aged About 58 Years R/o Village And Post - Rasmada, District - Durg Chhattisgarh 2. Shri Pradeep Kumar Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd., Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District - Durg Chhattisgarh 3. The Controlling Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WITH WPL No. 121 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited Registered Office - 5, Bentick Street, Kolkata-700001 (West Bengal), And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre, Borai, Rasmada, District - Durg (C.G.) - 491009, Through - Authorized Authority Sudhir Joshi S/o Late Shri Mudhukar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai, Industrial Growth Centre, Borai, Rasmada, District - Durg (C.G.) - 491009 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Lokeshwar Sahu S/o Shri Nasik Sahu Sinha Aged About 49 Years R/o Village And Post - Rasmada, District - Rajnandgaon (Chhattisgarh) 2. Shri Padmini Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industies Pvt. Ltd., Rasmada, Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District - Durg (Chhattisgarh) 3. The Controlling Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg (Chhattisgarh) 4 WITH --- Respondent(s) WPL No. 120 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited Registered Office-5, Bentinck Street Kolkata- 700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.) 491009, Through Authorized Authority Sudhir Joshi, Son Of Late Shri Madhukar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.) 491009 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Rajesh Sahu S/o Shri Rathi Ram Aged About 48 Years R/o Village And Post Rasmada District - Durg (C.G.) 2. Shri Padmini Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd. Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District - Durg (C.G.) 3. The Controlling Athoritey Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg (Chhattisgarh ) --- Respondent(s) WITH WPL No. 119 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Registered Office - 5, Bentinck Street Kolkata - 700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, District Durg C.G. 491009, Through Authorized Authority Sudhir Joshi, Son Of Late Shri Madhukar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai, Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 491009 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Parwati Yadav W/o Shri Late Shri Vishnu Yadav Aged About 52 Years R/o Village And Post Rasmada, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 5 2. Shri Pradeep Kumar M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd., Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 3. The Controlling Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WITH WPL No. 118 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Registered Office- 5, Bentinck Street Kolkata- 700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, Bistrict Durg (C.G.)- 491009, Through Authorized Authority Sudhir Joshi, Son Of Late Shri Mudhakar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.)- 491009 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1. Jitendra Vaishnav S/o Shri Dwarika Das Vaishnav Aged About 55 Years R/o Village And Post- Rasmada, District- Durg (C.G.) 2. Shri Padmini Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd, Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District- Durg Chhattisgarh. 3. The Controlling Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act, 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WITH WPL No. 117 of 2025  Jai Balaji Industries Limited Registered Office-5, Bentinck Street Kolkata- 700001 (West Bengal) And Factory Place At Industrial Growth Centre Borai, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.) 491009, Through Authorized Authority Sudhir Joshi, Son Of Late Shri Madhukar Joshi, Aged About 60 Years, Working For Gain At Jai Balaji Industries Limited, Borai Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District Durg (C.G.) 491009 ---Petitioner(s) 6 Versus 1. Ram Nivas Soni S/o Shri Firtu Soni Aged About 46 Years R/o Village And Post- Rasmada, District- Durg (Chhattisgarh) 2. Shri Padmini Dhurve M/s Kumar Undertaking, C/o Jai Balaji Industries Pvt. Ltd, Rasmada Industrial Growth Centre, Rasmada, District- Durg (Chhattisgarh) 3. The Controlling Authority Under The Payment Of Gratuity Act 1972 And Assistant Labour Commissioner, Durg, Distt- Durg (Chhattisgarh) --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy. G.A. Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy. G.A. Mr. Sanjeev Agrawal, P.L. Mr. Lav Sharma, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 25-06-2025 1) Today, these matters are listed for order(s) on default(s). 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that xerox copies of orders impugned passed by the Controlling Authority have been placed on record. He further submits that identical matters have already been disposed wherein direction has been issued to the Controlling Authority to decide pending applications moved under provisions of Rule 11 (5) of the C.G. Payment of Gratuity Rules, 1973. He prays for exemption from filing the certified copies of the orders impugned. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent/State oppose. 7 4) Taking into consideration the fact that identical matters have

Decision

already been disposed of and petitioner has placed on record the xerox copies of the orders impugned, therefore, the oral prayer made by Mr. Pandey is allowed and office objections are hereby ignored. Heard on admission. 5) The above captioned Writ Petitions involve common questions of law and facts therefore they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 6) In these petitions, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 07.03.2025 (in all petitions) passed by the Controlling Authority under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as “Act, 1972”), whereby, the petitioner was directed to pay gratuity to the private respondents. 7) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that:- (i) The petitioner is not an employer of the employees, who moved applications before the Controlling Authority, (ii) The order impugned was passed ex-parte and there was no service of summons. (iii) The application moved under Section 11 (5) of the C.G. Payment of Gratuity Rules, 1973 (for short “Rules, 1973”) has not been considered and decided by the learned Controlling Authority. He would further submit that applications under the provisions of Rule 11(5) of the Rules, 1973 were moved in all cases and those applications have not been decided by the 8 learned Controlling Authority. He would also submit that a direction may be issued to the learned Controlling Authority to decide the pending applications on merits and strictly in accordance with the law. 8) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent- State would oppose. They would submit that final orders have already been passed in all cases by the Controlling Authority and the petitioner has a remedy to prefer appeals before the appellate authority under the provisions of the Rules, 1973. They would further submit that the petitioner may raise all available grounds in appeals. They would contend that these petitions deserve to be dismissed. 9) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 10) Perusal of the orders impugned would show that final orders have been passed in all cases by the Controlling Authority on 07.03.2025 under the Rules, 1973. It appears that ex-parte orders were passed; therefore, the petitioner moved applications for setting-aside ex-parte orders in all cases and those applications have not been decided by the Controlling Authority. 11) Taking into consideration the limited issue involved in these cases, all writ petitions are disposed of with a direction to the learned Controlling Authority to decide the pending applications moved by the petitioner under the provisions of Rule 11(5) of the Rules, 1973 strictly in accordance with the law. 9 12) The petitioner would be at liberty to move applications for the grant of stay before the Controlling Authority and the Controlling Authority shall decide the applications for the grant of stay within a period of 60 days. 13) With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petitions are hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2025.06.27 10:22:13 +0530

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments