Dattatraya Namdev Raut and Ors. v. Head Master (Late Chandrakant Vasantrao Patil (Madhyamik) Vidyalaya and Ors.

Bombay HC29 Aug 2006WP/5105/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay held that a petitioner retired from service at an unaided school is entitled to claim gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The court directed the respondents to determine the gratuity amount within four months.

What did the court decide?

The respondents shall take appropriate decision on the gratuity claim within a period of four months from the date.

Dattatraya Namdev Raut and Ors. Vs Head… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2006)

¶1

 - 1 -

¶2

 (G.C.P.)J 455 (5,00,000)-11.2001) Spl-H.C.,A.S.,C.D.,78e

¶3

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 APPELLATE SIDE
 WRIT PETITION NO.5105 OF 2005

¶4

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court’s or Judge’s orders
 of Coram, appearances, Court’s
 order or directions and
 Registrar’s order.

¶5

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri R.G.Jagtap for the petitioner.

¶6

 Shri C.R.Sonawane, AGP for the respondent
 Nos.2 to 4.

¶7

 None for the respondent Nos.1 and 5.

¶8

--

¶9

 CORAM: R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR
 &
 NARESH H.PATIL, JJ
 DATED: 29th August, 2006.

¶10

 P.C.

¶11

 1. Heard. Rule. By consent, the rule

¶12

 made returnable forthwith.

¶13

 2. The learned advocate for the
 petitioner fairly conceded that in view of
 the fact that the petitioner retired from
 the services when the School was unaided
 school, the question of the petitioner’s
 claiming pension does not arise, and
 therefore, the petitioner is not pressing
 for the relief claimed in the clause (b) of

¶14

 - 2 -

¶15

 paragraph 15 of the petition.

¶16

 3. In the circumstances, the only
 grievance which remains to be considered
 relates to the claim for gratuity amount.
 In that regard, the attention is drawn to
 the unreported decision of this Court in the

¶17

 matter of Murlidhar Shankar Sumant & Ors.

¶18

v. The Education Officer & Ors., in the

¶19

 Writ Petition No.4808 of 1988 delivered on
 23rd March, 2001 along with the matters in
 Writ Petition Nos.1967 of 1994 and 358 of
 1994 wherein this Court had held that
 irrespective of the fact that the School is
 unaided, the teachers would be entitled to
 claim gratuity amount.

¶20

 4. The learned AGP while referring to
 the affidavit in reply filed by Shri Chavan
 Rajkumar Nathuram on 23rd June, 2006 fairly
 submitted that the law in this point being
 well settled, the petitioner would be
 entitled for gratuity amount. Since there
 is no dispute on the point that the
 petitioner would be entitled for the
 gratuity amount in terms of Sections 7 and 8
 of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 as has been
 clearly stated in the said affidavit, the

¶21

 - 3 -

¶22

 respondents shall take appropriate decision

¶23

 in that regard on the basis of the copy of
 the Writ Petition which shall be treated as
 representation for the said claim. The
 needful shall be done within a period of

¶24

 four months from today. The rule is made
 absolute accordingly with no order as to
 costs.

¶25

 (R.M.S.KHANDEPARKAR, J )

¶26

 (NARESH H. PATIL, J )

Dattatraya Namdev Raut and Ors. v. Head Master (Late Chandrakant Vasantrao Patil (Madhyamik) Vidyalaya and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dattatraya Namdev Raut and Ors. v. Head Master (Late Chandrakant Vasantrao Patil (Madhyamik) Vidyalaya and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Anand Bhosale Vs Tanaji Shamrao Lagare and Ors.

The Nashik Municipal Corporation Vs Dr.Yashwant Wamanrao Patil and Ors.

Dr.M.S.Ghawte Vs the Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Arun G.Lalit Vs State Govt.of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mangal Anil Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Narayan Korga Pujari Vs Gandhi Education Society Kundal and Ors.