Interim/procedural order only — no point on merits decided. Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench), Anil L. Pansare, J., 25.02.2025, in Writ Petitions Nos. 562, 563 and 564 of 2025 (Zilla Parishad Amravati and anr. v. Naresh Purushottam Nirgude and anr.; Pramod Rambhau Mohite and anr.; Suresh Sudamrao Tantarpale and anr.). The petitioners challenge orders of the Controlling Authority passed under Section 7(4)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 concerning gratuity claims of respondent No.1 employees. By earlier order dated 06.02.2025 the Court had called upon the petitioners to justify maintainability notwithstanding the statutory appeal under sub-section (7) of Section 7, and to deposit the amount in terms of its proviso. On 25.02.2025, counsel for petitioners argued that (i) the challenge filed on or about 28.01.2025 is beyond the stipulated appeal period, so no appeal can lie even with liberty; (ii) the Controlling Authority lacked jurisdiction; (iii) Zilla Parishad employees, being governed by the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982, fall outside the definition of 'employee' in Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act; and (iv) a Zilla Parishad answers to none of the establishments (factory, mine, oilfield, plantation, port, railway company, shop or other establishment) for which the Act frames a gratuity scheme. No ruling recorded on these contentions. Notice issued returnable in four weeks; A.G.P. waived service for respondent No.2 – State; petitioners directed to serve respondent No.1 by all permissible modes including speed post with affidavit of service.
