Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. In the light of the conclusive decision of the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court, such ground which is raised by the petitioner and the basis for entertaining this writ petition is no more available. In view of the same, this writ petition cannot…
Judgment
W.P.(MD) No.23504 of 2017BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 02.04.2025CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMARW.P.(MD) No.23504 of 2017andW.M.P.(MD) No.19770 of 2017 The Management, Kumbakonam Central Cooperative Bank Limited, Rep., by its Managing Director/Joint Registrar, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District.... PetitionerVs.
M.Singaravelu2.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Gratuity), Controlling Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, O/o. Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tiruchirappalli-20.
The President, Vadakkapparaiyur Primary AgriculturalCooperative Credit Society, Vadakkapparaiyur, Keevalur Taluk, Nagappattinam District.... Respondents_________Page 1 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.23504 of 2017 Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the second respondent vide P.G.No.381/2016, dated 31.07.2017 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja SethupathiFor Respondents: Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam – for R1: Mr.R.Ragavendran Government Advocate – for RR2 & 3ORDERThis writ petition has been filed against an order passed by the Respondent No.2-Controlling Authority under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1972”) directing payment of gratuity to Respondent No.1.2. Though an effective and efficacious alternate remedy of appeal is available under sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Act, 1972, the petitioner approached this Court by filing this writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the Respondent No.2 to entertain a claim for payment of gratuity otherwise _________Page 2 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.23504 of 2017than in terms of the provisions contained in the Act, 1972. In nutshell, it is the contention of the petitioner that Respondent No.2 lacks jurisdiction to entertain any claim for payment of gratuity otherwise than under the provisions of the Act, 1972.3. In view of the jurisdictional issue that was raised, this Court has entertained the writ petition and passed appropriate interim orders. Now that, the said issue is resolved by a Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court W.P.(MD) No.4452 of 2013 etc., dated 30.10.2024 affirmatively holding that the Controlling Authority has got jurisdiction to entertain a claim for payment of gratuity not only under the Payment of Gratuity Act but under the other provisions in specific “better terms of gratuity”.
Operative part
In the light of the conclusive decision of the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court, such ground which is raised by the petitioner and the basis for entertaining this writ petition is no more available. In view of the same, this writ petition cannot be entertained in view of the alternate remedy available under sub-section (7) of Section 7._________Page 3 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.23504 of 20175. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. The petitioner is granted liberty to file appeal within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and in case, if any such appeal is filed within the time stipulated above, the same shall be entertained by the learned Appellate Authority, however, without reference to the period of limitation prescribed under sub-section (7) of Section 7 of the Act, 1972 and the Rules. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.02.04.2025NCC : Yes/NoIndex : Yes/NoInternet : YesABR_________Page 4 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.23504 of 2017To1.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Gratuity), Controlling Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, O/o. Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Tiruchirappalli-20.2.The President, Vadakkapparaiyur Primary AgriculturalCooperative Credit Society, Vadakkapparaiyur, Keevalur Taluk, Nagappattinam District._________Page 5 of 6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.23504 of 2017MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.ABRW.P.(MD) No.23504 of 201702.04.2025_________Page 6 of 6
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Gratuity Act, 1972; Constitution of India — art. 226; Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972; Payment of Gratuity Act.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.