(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI) The applicant complains of non-compliance of the directions issued in Special Civil Application No.3432/2011.
In response to the notice issued by this Court, learned advocate Shri Arpit Kapadia appeared for the original employer respondent no.1 and pointed out that against the order passed by the Controlling Authority for payment of gratuity, respondent no.1 has filed an appeal. However, said appeal is not filed within the time limit. He stated that presently the proceeding is at the stage of considering the application for condonation of delay. He has further stated that along with the appeal requisite amount under the impugned order passed by the Controlling Authority have already been deposited.
By our order dated 11.4.2012, amount of Rs.29,455/- as calculated by respondent no.1 was ordered to be deposited with the Registry of this Court and Registry was directed to release the said amount in favour of the applicant of this application. Learned advocate for the applicant however, stated that amount of Rs.29,455/- was not correctly calculated and respondent no.1 was under an obligation to pay more amount to the applicant.
Be that as it may, presently since it is brought to our notice that respondent no.1 has already initiated proceedings of appeal challenging original order of the Controlling Authority, we do not think it proper now to continue with this contempt proceedings. Ultimate rights of the parties shall be decided in the pending appeal before the appellate authority. If there is any dispute about shortfall of any amount towards dues of the gratuity amount, it will be always open for the applicant to challenge before the appropriate authority.
Amount which is already deposited by respondent no.1 with the Registry of this Court shall be given adjustment towards ultimate amount which may be determined by the authority.
Learned advocate for the applicant has however, stated that respondent no.1 has deliberately flouted the order of the Controlling Authority, as also the order passed by this Court and the amount which is now deposited is also after a long time. He therefore, urged that respondent no.1 be saddled with cost of the litigation as for his default in payment of gratuity amount, the applicant has been dragged to the Court.
Taking note of the request made by learned counsel for the applicant and considering the fact that amount which was required to be paid was under the Payment of Gratuity Act, we are of the opinion that the interest of justice would be met if the respondent no.1 is directed to pay Rs.5000/- towards the cost of litigation. Accordingly, respondent no.1 is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- towards cost within two weeks from today.
With above direction, we dispose of this contempt petition.
(Akil Kureshi,J.) (C.L.
Soni,J.) (raghu) Top