Disposed¶15

Gloster Limited & Anr. v. State & Ors.

Calcutta HC15 May 2024WPA/24185/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposal of writ petition on respondent's renunciation of claim; Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972; controlling authority and appellate authority, Uluberia, Howrah; orders dated 22.12.2011 and 11.07.2012; gratuity of Rs. 8,814.96 with interest at 10% per annum; respondent No. 4 recorded as having no further claim; deposit returned to writ petitioner forthwith; Gloster Limited; WPA 24185 of 2012; CAN 1 of 2023; Partha Sarathi Sen, J.; decision dated 15.05.2024.

What did the court decide?

Interim application CAN 1 of 2023 allowed; WPA 24185 of 2012 disposed of by recording that respondent No. 4 has no further claim against the writ petitioner in relation to the orders dated 22.12.2011 and 11.07.2012; deposited amount of Rs. 8,814.96 with the appellate authority directed to be returned to the writ petitioner forthwith. ¶15

Gloster Limited & Anr. Vs State & Ors. — Calcutta HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶15

Issue for consideration

Whether the interim application (CAN 1 of 2023) filed by respondent No. 4, praying for disposal of the writ petition by recording that he has no further claim in respect of the orders dated 22.12.2011 and 11.07.2012 passed under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, ought to be allowed.

¶11

Court's answer

The Court found no predicament in allowing the interlocutory application (CAN 1 of 2023) by which respondent No. 4 sought disposal of the writ petition recording that he had no claim against the writ petitioner.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The interim application being CAN 1 of 2023 was allowed and WPA 24185 of 2012 was disposed of by recording that respondent No. 4 has no further claim against the writ petitioner in relation to the orders dated 22.12.2011 and 11.07.2012.

¶15

Key takeaways

In view of the disposal of the writ petition, the deposited amount of Rs. 8,814.96 with the appellate authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, Uluberia, Howrah, was directed to be returned to the writ petitioner forthwith.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WPA 24185 of 2012 — Gloster Limited & Anr. v. State of West Bengal & Ors. (decided 15.05.2024, Partha Sarathi Sen, J.). The writ petition concerned orders passed under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 by the controlling authority, Uluberia, Howrah (order dated 22.12.2011 directing payment of a further sum of Rs. 8,814.96 towards gratuity with interest at 10% per annum), upheld by the appellate authority by order dated 11.07.2012. On an interim application (CAN 1 of 2023) filed by respondent No. 4 praying for disposal of the writ petition by recording that he had no further claim in respect of those orders, the Court allowed the application, disposed of the writ petition recording respondent No. 4's no-further-claim against the writ petitioner, and directed that the deposited amount of Rs. 8,814.96 be returned to the writ petitioner forthwith.

¶1

S/L 77 15.05.2024 Court. No. 551 Suvayan

¶2

WPA 24185 of 2012 With CAN 1 of 2023

¶3

Gloster Limited & Anr. Vs.

¶4

State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶5

Mr. S. K. Singh Mr. Sujit Sharma

¶6

…for the petitioners.

¶7

Mr. Balai Ch. Paul Mr. Ravi Kr. Dubey

¶8

…for the respondent no. 4.

¶9

Since the interim application being CAN 1 of 2023 is not available in the file, the authenticated copy of CAN 1 of 2023 as filed by the learned Advocate for the respondent No. 4 is taken on record which is not disputed on behalf of learned Advocate for the writ petitioners.

¶10

The affidavit-of-service as filed by the learned Advocate for the respondent No. 4 be taken on record.

¶11

By filing the interim application being CAN 1 of 2023 the respondent No. 4 has prayed for disposal of the instant writ petition by recording that the respondent No. 4 has no further claim in respect of order dated 22.12.2011 as passed by the controlling authority, under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, Uluberia, Howrah and also in respect order dated 11.07.2012 as passed by appellate authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

¶12

¶13

At the time of hearing, it is submitted at the Bar by drawing attention to page No. 54 and 55 of the instant writ petition that on 22.12.2011 an order has been passed by the aforementioned controlling authority directing the writ petitioner/company to pay a further sum of Rs. 8,814.96 towards gratuity together with interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum. It is further submitted at the Bar that challenging the said order of the controlling authority an appeal was preferred before the appellate authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, Uluberia, Howrah and by an order dated 11.07.2012 (page No. 77 of the writ petition) the said appellate authority upheld the finding of the controlling authority dated 22.12.2011.

¶14

Since the respondent No. 4 by filing the instant interlocutory application has prayed for disposal of the instant writ petition recording that he has got no claim against the writ petitioner, this Court finds no predicament in allowing such petition.

¶15

Accordingly, the interim application being CAN 1 of 1 of 2023 is hereby allowed. As a result WPA 24185 of 2012 is disposed of by recording that the respondent No. 4 has got no further claim against the writ petitioner in relation to the abovementioned orders dated 22.12.2011 and 11.07.2012.

¶16

In view of the disposal of the instant writ petition, the deposited amount of Rs. 8,814.96 with the appellate authority under the payment of Gratuity Act, 1972,

¶17

¶18

Uluberia, Howrah be returned to the writ petitioner forthwith.

¶19

All parties to the instant writ petition, more specifically the respondent No. 2 are directed to act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Court.

¶20

Urgent photostat certified copies of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance with all the necessary formalities.

¶21

(Partha Sarathi Sen, J.)

Gloster Limited & Anr. v. State & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gloster Limited & Anr. v. State & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rabindra Nath Dinda Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Pankaj Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Debasish Pramanik Vs State of Wb & Ors.

Shiv Kumar Vs Union of India and Ors.

Md. Jiyad Ali Mondal Vs Md. Ajijur Rahman Molla and Ors.

Sitaram Bag Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.