that as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, the State respondent is liable to make payment of gratuity as would be evident from the provision of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, but no such decision was taken fairly for a long period and finally he approached the writ Court, wherein the learned Single Judge, even though, has come to the conclusion about the entitlement of the writ petitioner as per the provision as contained in Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, has refused to issue direction for making payment of interest as per the statutory provision, rather directed to make payment of lump sum amount of Rs.50,000/-, even though it was brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge that the service record of the writ petitioner was not traceable and hence delay in making payment of interest had been caused, and when there is delay on the part of the authority, there is no reason to deny interest in favour of the writ petitioner-appellant as per the statutory provision, but without appreciating this aspect of the matter, the writ petition has been disposed of, merely by issuing direction to make payment of Rs.50,000/- by way of lump sum compensation.
