Labour Appellate Tribunal gave an award in April, 1954 removing the ceiling on the payment of gratuity only under the Divetia award as it was an anomaly. This modification along with other modifications was incorporated into the Shastry Award by the Industrial Disputes (Banking companies) Decision Act, 1955 (41 of 1955) which was to be in force till 31.3.1959. This Act statutorily protected subsequently under Sec.7 of the State Bank of India Act, 1955 which came into force on 01.07.1955 relating to pension, gratuity and the other matters of the Imperial Bank of India, till they are duly altered according to law, but there was no alteration. One P.V.Raju, who retired in April, 1986 filed a case under the Act claiming differential gratuity, which was ordered by the controlling authority in 1992 to be paid by the third respondent-bank, which was confirmed by appellate authority, against which the bank filed a writ petition in W.P.No.16842/94 on the file of the High Court, Andhra Pradesh, which is pending. It was further stated that though the learned Single Judge held the condonation wrong, in W.A.Nos.230 and 253 to 273 of 1996, the Division Bench held that on construction of the Gratuity Central Rules, there was really no delay, which will apply to this case also. The controlling authority subsequently computed the differential gratuity against which the Bank has gone to the High Court by way of appeal. In the light of the above developments, they have filed similar claims for differential gratuity in 1994/95 before the third respondent employer under Rule 10 of the Central Rules. The third respondent neither accepted nor negatived the claim but kept quiet; however, they filed the application for differential gratuity in Form-N within 90 days from the date of their application to the employer claiming differential gratuity. The bank did not take any steps to pay the difference. On such averments, the petitioners filed this writ petition praying for the relief stated supra.
