Dismissed

Rajasthan State Co-Operative Consumer Federation Limited v. Fateh Singh S/O Shri Kalyan Singh

Rajasthan HC1 Jun 2019CW/1800/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition because the statutory alternative remedy under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 remains available. The Court held that the petitioner must approach the Appellate Authority, noting that delay may be condoned under the Act. The writ petition is barred.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to approach the Appellate Authority with an application for condonation of delay.

Rajasthan State Co-Operative Consumer Federation… — Writ and Judicial Review | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1800/2019

¶3

Rajasthan State Co-Operative Consumer Federation Limited, Through Its Managing Director, 273, 2Nd Floor, Nehru Sahakar Bhawan, Bhawani Singh Road, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Fateh Singh S/o Shri Kalyan Singh, 372, Jaswant Nagar, Khatipura, Jhotwara, Road, Jaipur.

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Brihgu Sharma with Mr.Akarsh Mathur For Respondent(s) :

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

¶10

Order

¶11

01/06/2019

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner-employer, after making submissions for sometime, submitted that the petitioneremployer is a Cooperative Federation and as such, due to requirement of pre-deposit of the amount ordered by the Controlling Authority, the appeal has not been filed in the instant case challenging the order dated 4^th April, 2018 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short “the Act of 1972”) .

¶13

This court finds that the petitioner has to first file appeal before the Appellate Authority as provided under Section 7(7) of the Act of 1972.

¶14

(2 of 2)

¶15

[CW-1800/2019]

¶16

Learned counsel submitted that the period of sixty days of filing appeal has expired and as such, the filing of appeal will be barred by limitation.

¶17

This Court finds that the order of Controlling Authority is required to be assailed before the Appellate Authority and subsection (7) of Section 7 of the Act of 1972 provides that the Appellate Authority, if finds there is a sufficient cause of not preferring the appeal within stipulated time, the said period can be condoned where delay occasions on account of not approaching the Appellate Forum.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner-employer seeks liberty to approach the Appellate Authority and further he seeks permission of this Court for allowing the petitioner-employer to move appropriate application for condoning the delay and approaching the Appellate Authority.

¶19

The present writ petition is dismissed, as statutory alternative remedy is available to the petitioner-employer.

¶20

If the petitioner-employer files the application for condonation of delay, the Appellate Authority will consider the entire facts and will decide the application as per the provisions of law.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner-employer is permitted to take back the certified copy of the order of the Controlling Authority.

¶22

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

¶23

Jatin /381/1

Rajasthan State Co-Operative Consumer Federation Limited v. Fateh Singh S/O Shri Kalyan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajasthan State Co-Operative Consumer Federation Limited v. Fateh Singh S/O Shri Kalyan Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chitralekha Yadav D/O Shri Ishwerdeen Yadav W/O Shri Arun Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Rajasthan

Subodh Kumar Dhaker S/O Sh. Kashiramji Vs the State of Rajasthan

Vikram Singh S/O Shri Bhav Singh Vs Jaipur City Transport Services Limited

Hari Shankar Sharma Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Baldev Singh Fauzdar S/O Shri Atar Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Rajendra Prasad Saini Son of Shri Moolchand Saini Vs State of Rajasthan, through Secretary