It has been submitted by Shri Sujeet Kumar Rai, learned counsel for petitioner that the impugned order passed by the prescribed authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972/Assistant Labour Commissioner is without jurisdiction as the cooperative societies are not covered under Section 3 of Payment of Gratuity Act.
Refuting the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel has submitted that writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has got an alternative remedy to file an appeal under Section 7(7) of Payment of Gratuity Act. He has also contended that there is no such pleadings that what kind of the petitioner's society is and it will not full under the definition of the establishment which are under the purview of Section1(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act.
However, considering this fact that number of writ petitions have been filed and entertained, this writ petition is also being entertained.
Issue notice.
Notices on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2 have been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel, therefore, need not be served again.
Issue notice to respondent no.3 through registered post returnable at an early date.
As an interim measure without prejudice to the right and contention of the parties, subject to the deposit of entire amount pursuant to the order dated 11.11.2009, passed by Prescribed Authority in P.G. Case No.34 of 2008, the recovery proceeding pursuant to the order dated 11.11.2009 shall remain stayed. However, the respondent no.3 shall have right to withdraw 30% of the deposited amount without furnishing security and 10% after furnishing security to the satisfaction of the Prescribed Authority, Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972/Assistant Labour Commissioner, Kanpur Division, Kanpur. The remaining amount be kept in fixed deposit in the nationalised bank. The fate of which will depended on the result of the writ petition.
Order Date :- 23.6.2010 Mustaqeem.