Dismissed

Chief Executive Off. Dis. Co-Ope. Bank v. Ganga Prasad Gupta and Others

Chhattisgarh HC7 Dec 2017WP227/196/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition under Article 227 challenging orders under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 denying gratuity. The court examined whether forced retirement amounts to termination. Relying on precedent, the Judge held services were not terminated, directing payment, and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition under Article 227 is dismissed as it has no merit.

Chief Executive Off. Dis. Co-Ope. Bank… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Writ Petition (227) No. 196 of 20 09

¶5

The Chief Executive Officer, District Cooperative Central Bank Ltd., Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) (Respondent before Appellate Authority)

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Ganga Prasad Gupta, S/o Kallu Prasad Gupta, Retired Samiti Prabandhank, R/o In front of Nagar Palika, Chandiya Road, Umaria (M.P.)

¶9

The Appellate Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Cum Deputy Labour Commissioner, Office of Labour Commissioner Chhattisgarh, Raipur

¶10

The Controlling Authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Cum Labour Officer, Office Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.)

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/State: Mr. Ashish Surana, Panel Lawyer

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

¶14

Order On Board

¶15

0 7 / 12/2017

¶16

(1) The respondent No.1/employee was compulsory retired on 28.12.2000, but his gratuity was withheld by the petititioner-Bank leading to filing of application for payment of gratuity before the Controlling Authority. The Controlling Authority, by its order dated 25.02.2008, directed the payment of gratuity amounting to Rs. 1,06,996/- along with 10% interest to respondent No.1, which was duly affirmed by the appellate authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act., against which instant writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed questioning the same.

¶17

¶18

(3) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order passed by controlling Authority as affirmed by the appellate authority is bad is unsustainable in law, which is liable to be set aside.

¶19

(4) Per contra, counsel for the State would support the impugned order.

¶20

(5) I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival submissions made hereinabove and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection.

¶21

(6) Admittedly, the respondent No.1 was compulsory retired and he was not terminated from the services; and as per Section 4(6) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short “Act, 1972”), gratuity of an employee, whose services have been terminated, shall be forfeited to the extent of the loss so caused.

¶22

(7) Undisputedly, the services of the respondent No.1 was not terminated and, therefore, as per provisions contained in Section 4(6) of the Act, 1972, both the courts below are justified in directing payment of gratuity to the respondent No.1/employee {See Jashbir Singh Vs. Punjab & Sind Bank and others¹ }

¶23

(8) In view of above above legal proposition, I do not find any merit in the instant writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s).

¶24

Sd/-

¶25

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge

¶26

D/-

¶27

1(2007) 1 SCC 566

¶28

Chief Executive Off. Dis. Co-Ope. Bank v. Ganga Prasad Gupta and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chief Executive Off. Dis. Co-Ope. Bank v. Ganga Prasad Gupta and Others

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

Jagsai Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Laxmi Prasad Gupta Vs Mahaveer Agrawal and Ors.

Panik Ram Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others

Dhanesh Bandhe Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Reliance Infratel Limited Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Cement Corporation Of India Ltd. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.