Sukhlal Debnath vs State Of Tripura And Others

Indrajit Mahanty, CJ

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the respondents at the time of call. The writ petition has come to be filed with the following prayers:

"(i) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to pay interest @9% per annum on Rs.10,00,000/-, w.e.f., 01.05.2020 to 07.10.2020.

(ii) Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or order/orders and/or direction/directions of like nature shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to pay interest @9% per annum on Rs.3,79,076/-, w.e.f., 01.05.2020 till the date of payment.

(iii) Make the rules absolute.

(iv) Call for records.

(v) Pass any further order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court considered fit and proper."

Although no counsel appeared for the respondents at the time of call, this Court has perused the reply affidavit filed by the respondents and in particular, paragraph-8 thereof which is extracted hereunder:

"(8) That, in reply to the statement made in paragraph 9, 12 & 14 of the writ petition it is stated that, the payment of gratuity amount of Rs.10.00 lakhs was made on 7/10/2020 as per State Govt. Notification. Since the State Govt. has not yet implemented a ceiling limit of Rs.20.00 lakhs for its employees, it is not possible for THHDCL to make gratuity payment at higher rate."

Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.128 of 2020 whereby a Bench presided over by Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Akil Kureshi relied upon an earlier judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Sri Bhupati Debnath Vs. The State of Tripura and Ors. in WP(C) No.1054 of 2019 decided on 13.02.2020. The said petitioner was also an employee of the Tripura Handloom and Handicrafts Development Corporation Limited (the present respondent) and after referring to various provisions in Bhupati Debnath case, the following findings were arrived at:

" *                   *                     *

It can thus be seen that insofar as the payment of gratuity, its computation and the ceiling up to which such amount can be paid as referred to in Section 4 of the said Act, the term "appropriate Government" has no bearing. This distinction is also apparent from the statement of objects and reasons which provides that for the purpose of uniformity, the Central Act was envisaged. At the same time, appropriate Government is for the purpose of administering the Act. The ceiling limit for payment of gratuity is provided in sub-section (3) of Section 4. Previously, such ceilings were contained in the sub-section itself. Pursuant to amendment by virtue of Act 12 of 2018 the power to prescribe such ceiling has been vested in the Central Government to be exercised by issuing notification in this regard. It is in exercise of such delegated powers of legislation that the Central Government has issued a notification dated 29.03.2018 which reads as under:

"S.O. 1420 (E).-In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (39 of 1972), the Central Government hereby specifies that the amount of gratuity payable to an employee under the said Act shall not exceed twenty lakh rupees."

This revised ceiling thus would apply to all establishments irrespective of whether they are controlled or governed by the State or the Central Government as the appropriate Government. The stand of the respondents, therefore, that unless and until such revised ceiling of payment of gratuity is adopted by the State Government, the employees of the said corporation cannot claim benefit of such revised limit cannot be accepted. Revised ceiling limit of ₹20,00,000 (rupees twenty lakhs) would be applicable to the petitioner.

The corporation cannot cite the reason of financial constraints indefinitely for paying post retiral benefits of its employees. The petitioner has put in more than 29 years of service. His service is not governed by the pension scheme. After his retirement, therefore, he would have only savings in the form of gratuity, provident fund accumulated in his account and leave encashment, if any, to fall back upon in his old age. Such amount must, therefore, be paid over to him as soon as possible.

Under the circumstances, petition is disposed of with following directions:

(i) As provided earlier, the petitioner shall apply to the respondent No.2 stating his calculation of payable gratuity. The respondent No.2 shall examine the petitioner's calculation and convey to him if any gratuity remains still payable;

(ii) While calculating such gratuity, revised limit of ₹20,00,000 (rupees twenty lakhs) shall be applicable;

(iii) If there is any shortfall in payment of gratuity, the same shall be paid within a period of 4(four) months from today with simple interest @ 7.5% per annum from one month after the date of superannuation till actual payments;

(iv) The remaining amount of leave encashment shall be released within a period of 4(four) months from today. The entire leave encashment payment shall carry simple interest @ 7.5% per annum from one month after the date of retirement till actual payments;

(v) The gratuity already paid shall also carry simple interest @ 7.5% per annum from one month after the date of retirement till actual payments.

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of."

Under the circumstances, this petition is allowed. It is provided that the respondents shall pay the remaining sum over and above Rs.10,00,000/- paid to the petitioner with simple interest @ 7.5% per annum after completion of one month of his retirement till actual payment. Petitioner had also made a prayer for release of the leave encashment benefit. If the said amount has not been released, the said amount shall also be released in favour of the petitioner within a period as directed.

Petition is disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.