1. Heard learned advocate Ms. Niyati K. Shah appearing on behalf of petitioner.
2. There are two orders which are under challenge; one order is dated 28th May 2008 passed by appellate authority and second order is dated 31st May 2008 passed by controlling authority, Mehsana under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
3. Initially, controlling authority has passed an order with a direction to the petitioner to pay Rs.82,528/- with 9% interest w.e.f. 30th April 2003. Against which, appeal was preferred by petitioner, at that occasion, amount directed by controlling authority is deposited by the petitioner before the controlling authority, Mehsana. The petitioner is having the original challan. The appeal was decided by appellate authority while setting aside the order of controlling authority. The matter was remanded back to controlling authority to decide again in accordance with law. After remanding the matter back to the controlling authority, the controlling authority again decided the matter and come to the same conclusion with a direction to the petitioner to pay as referred above. Against which, the appeal was preferred by the petitioner where appellate authority wants to produce original challan from the petitioner that amount in question ordered by controlling authority is deposited by the petitioner or not. According to petitioner, challan was handed over to learned advocate who has already shown challan to appellate authority, even though, appeal was not proceeded only on the ground that challan was not produced by petitioner. On the basis of the aforesaid order dated 28th May 2008 passed by appellate authority, the controlling authority has directed to petitioner to pay the amount of gratuity to the respondent within a period of ten days.
4. Therefore, in light of these factual backgrounds, it is directed to appellate authority, Ahmedabad under the Payment of Gratuity Act in respect to letter dated 28th May 2008 issued to Chief Officer, Kadi Nagarpalika against the remand order No.5 of 2004 in appeal, to verify the facts from the controlling authority, Mehsana that whether amount directed by controlling authority is deposited by petitioner before controlling authority, Mehsana or not. Let this fact may be verified by the appellate authority himself for his satisfaction if the say of the petitioner is not believed by the appellate authority and then, to proceed with the appeal filed by petitioner in accordance with law without fail.
5. Meanwhile, it is directed to controlling authority not to disburse the amount of gratuity which has been deposited by the petitioner to the respondent.
6. In view of aforesaid observations and directions, present petition is disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits.
[H.K.
RATHOD, J.] #Dave