Disposed

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank of Baroda v. Surya Prakash Mahawar S/O Late Shri Kanhiya Lal Mahawar

Rajasthan HC13 Jan 2026CW/8683/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of multiple writ petitions filed by Bank Of Baroda challenging orders of the Controlling Officer under the Payment of Gratuity Act. The court held that though maintainable under Article 226, the petitions were not entertainable as the employer had a statutory appeal. It granted liberty to file the appeal and directed the Appellate Authority to decide it timely.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners granted liberty to file appeal under Section 7(7) within 60 days; impugned order stayed pending appeal disposal.

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank of Baroda Vs Surya… — Service and Employment | Rajasthan HC (2026)

¶1

[2026:RJ-JP:1397]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8683/2021

¶4

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Surya Prakash Mahawar S/o Late Shri Kanhiya Lal Mahawar, Aged About 66 Years, Resident Of 4/9, Sfs Agarwal Farm, Mansarovar, Jaipur-302020.

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

Connected With

¶10

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8684/2021

¶11

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶12

----Petitioner

¶13

Versus

¶14

Mohan Lal Sharma, S/o. Badri Narain Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, R/o. Plot No. 232, Gayatri Nagar-A, Durgapura, Maharani Farm, Jaipur - 302018.

¶15

----Respondent

¶16

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8686/2021

¶17

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶18

----Petitioner

¶19

Versus

¶20

Dinesh Kumar Maheshwari, S/o. Ramswaroop Maheshwari, Aged About 66 Years, R/o. Vasundhra 29, Shiv Shakti Nagar, Ajmer Road, Shyam Nagar, Jaipur - 302019.

¶21

----Respondent

¶22

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8687/2021

¶23

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶24

----Petitioner

¶25

Versus

¶26

Ajay Kumar Agarwal S/o Ashok Kumar Agarwal, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Plot No. 2/107, Near Gita Mandir, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur - 302004.

¶27

----Respondent

¶28

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8688/2021

¶29

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda

(2 of 7)

[2026:RJ-JP:1397]

[CW-8683/2021]

Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara 390007 (Gujarat)

¶34

----Petitioner

¶35

Versus

¶36

Jagdish Balai S/o Mohanlal, R/o Ab-360, Nirman Nagar, Ajmer Road, Jaipur-302019

¶37

----Respondent

¶38

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8689/2021

¶39

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶40

----Petitioner

¶41

Versus

¶42

Kandarp Kumar Thakore, S/o. Hiralal Thakore, Aged About 65 Years, R/o. Plot No. 6, Hira Nagar, Near Dcm Shop, Ajmer Road, Jaipur - 302021.

¶43

----Respondent

¶44

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8691/2021

¶45

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara 390007 (Gujarat)

¶46

----Petitioner

¶47

Versus

¶48

Nand Kishore Agarwal S/o Bachhraj Agarwal, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Plot No. 678, Sita Vihar, Vidyut Nagar-A, Ajmer Road, Jaipur 302021

¶49

----Respondent

¶50

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8692/2021

¶51

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara 390007 (Gujarat)

¶52

----Petitioner

¶53

Versus

¶54

Subhash Chander Arora S/o Thakur Dutt Arora, Aged About 64 Years, R/o C/003, Anukampa Residency, Shanti Nagar, Durgapura, Jaipur 302018

¶55

----Respondent

¶56

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8693/2021

¶57

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶58

----Petitioner

¶59

Versus

¶60

Ram Babu Gupta S/o Mitthan Lal Gupta, Aged About 65 Years,

¶61

(3 of 7) [CW-8683/2021]

¶62

[2026:RJ-JP:1397]

¶63

Resident Of A-373, Ekta Path, Vidyut Nagar-A, Ajmer Road, Jaipur- 302021.

¶64

----Respondent

¶65

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8694/2021

¶66

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶67

----Petitioner

¶68

Versus

¶69

Gopal Krishan Sharma S/o Sita Ram Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, Resident Of 223, Gyatri Nagar-B, Durgapura, Maharani Farm, Jaipur-302018.

¶70

----Respondent

¶71

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8696/2021

¶72

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶73

----Petitioner

¶74

Versus

¶75

Jagdish Narayan Sharma S/o Kalyan Sahai Sharma, Aged About 65 Years, Resident Of 140/10, Shipra Path, Mansarovar, Jaipur - 302020.

¶76

----Respondent

¶77

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8709/2021

¶78

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶79

----Petitioner

¶80

Versus

¶81

Madan Mohan Kakkar S/o Khemchand Kakkar, Aged About 66 Years, R/o 66, Himmat Nagar, Tonk Road, Gopalpura Mod, Jaipur-302018.

¶82

----Respondent

¶83

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8714/2021

¶84

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶85

----Petitioner

¶86

Versus

¶87

Sita Ram Sharma S/o Bhagwan Sahai Sharma, Aged About 64 Years, Resident Of 68, Raghu Vihar, Maharani Farm, Durgapura, Jaipur- 302018.

¶88

----Respondent

¶89

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8717/2021

¶90

(4 of 7) [CW-8683/2021]

¶91

[2026:RJ-JP:1397]

¶92

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank Of Baroda, 6Th Floor, Baroda Bhawan, Head Office, Alkapuri, R.c. Dutt Road, Vadodara390007 (Gujarat).

¶93

----Petitioner

¶94

Versus

¶95

Hazari Lal Bairwa S/o Mangal Ram Bairwa, Aged About 64 Years, R/o Plot No. 83, Mahavir Nagar-Ii, Maharani Farm, Durgapura, Jaipur-302018.

¶96

----Respondent

¶97

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Rupin Kala
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Lokendra Singh Kachhawa Ms. Bhawna Chouhan

¶98

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 13/01/2026

¶99

These writ petitions were filed by the petitioners aggrieved from order dated 30.03.2021/26.03.2021 and 16.04.2021 passed by the Controlling Officer under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

¶100

Learned counsel appearing for respondent(s) submits that the petitioner has straightaway approached this Hon'ble Court by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He further submits that identical issue was considered by a Coordinate Bench on 24.10.2019 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17856/2019, The Chairman Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank Vs. Shyam Lal Joshi. He also submits that currently the Appellate Authority is functioning and the petitioners may be directed to approach the Appellate Authority for availing the remedy provided under Section 7(7) of the "Act of 1972".

¶101

Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner and he submits that when these writ petitions were filed, the Appellate Authority was not functional

[2026:RJ-JP:1397]

[CW-8683/2021]

(5 of 7)

and the petitioner(s) were constraint to approach this Court by invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He further submits that the controversy as raised by the petitioner is already considered and decided by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in case of Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank

¶106

Jodhpur Vs. The Appellate Authority, D.B. Civil Writ Petition

¶107

No.561/2020 under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the writ petitions are liable to be allowed and the order passed by the Controlling Officer is liable to be quashed. He also submits that in case this Hon'ble Court is of the opinion that an appeal is required to be filed under Section 7(7) of Act of 1972 then he may be provided protection and disposed with direction that the matter be decided within a time-bound period.

¶108

Having considered the submission of learned counsels for the parties and also on perusal of material placed on record, these writ petitions were filed from the order(s) passed under Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 whereby the Controlling Authority has determined the amount of gratuity and directed the petitioner-bank to make payment to the respondent(s).

¶109

Section 7(7) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 read as

¶110

under:-

¶111

Any person aggrieved by an order made under sub-section (4) may, within sixty days from the date of the receipt of the order, prefer an appeal to the appropriate Government or such other authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government in this behalf:

¶112

Provided that the appropriate Government or the appellate authority, as the case may be, may, if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the said period of sixty days, extend the said period by a further period of sixty days:

¶113

Provided further that no appeal by an employer shall be admitted unless at the time of preferring the appeal, the appellant either produces a certificate of the controlling

(6 of 7)

[2026:RJ-JP:1397]

[CW-8683/2021]

authority to the effect that the appellant has deposited with him an amount equal to the amount of gratuity required to be deposited under sub-section (4), or deposits with the appellate authority such amount.

¶118

It provides that aggrieved from order passed by the Controlling Authority an appeal may be preferred to the appropriate government or the such authority as may be specified by the appropriate Government.

¶119

Having taken note of the provision under the law these writ petitions are maintainable but they are not entertainable in view of Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act as the petitionerBank has an option to avail the remedy of statutory appeal as prescribed under the ‘Act of 1972’. Thus, leaving the legal issue open as raised by learned counsel for petitioner. The instant writ petitions are disposed of with following directions:-

¶120

(i) The petitioner is given a liberty to file an appeal as provided under Section 7(7) of the Act within a period of 60 days before the Appellate Authority as provided under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 having jurisdiction to decide and consider the matter.

¶121

(ii) The respondent(s) are directed to appear before the Appellate Authority, if a date is assigned or intimated by the counsel for the petitioner-bank.

¶122

(iii) The Appellate Authority shall register and appeal(s), if filed within 60 days and consider and decide the appeal as early as possible, preferably within a period of 3 months from service of first presence of all the parties before it.

¶123

(iv) The Appellate Authority shall consider the judgment dated 05.01.2022 in D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 561/2020, Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank Jodhpur Vs. The

¶124

(7 of 7) [CW-8683/2021]

¶125

[2026:RJ-JP:1397]

¶126

Appellate Authority as referred by the petitioner-bank and also they legal position as submitted by the counsel for the respondent.

¶127

The impugned order shall remain stayed till disposal of the appeal(s) by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

¶128

With aforesaid directions, these writ petitions stand disposed of with pending application(s), if any.

¶129

(ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J

¶130

MONU /25-38

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank of Baroda v. Surya Prakash Mahawar S/O Late Shri Kanhiya Lal Mahawar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank of Baroda v. Surya Prakash Mahawar S/O Late Shri Kanhiya Lal Mahawar

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

Arjun Singh Ranawat S/O Shri Durga Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil Kumar Jain S/O Shri Gopichand Jain Vs Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation

Shabbir Hussain Ansari S/O Shri Abdul Nazir Ansari Vs State of Rajasthan

Balram Tanwar S/O Sh. Dayaram Vs State of Rajasthan

The General Manager (Hrm), Bank of Baroda Vs Sita Ram Sharma S/O Bhagwan Sahai Sharma

The General Manager (Hrm) Vs Madan Mohan Kakkar S/O Khemchand Kakkar