Heard Sri Sanjay Bhasin, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Notice for opposite party No.1 has been accepted by the office of the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India and Sri Mahendra Kumar Mishra, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No.1, whereas notice for opposite party Nos.2 has been accepted by the office of the learned Chief Standing Counsel.
Issue notice to opposite party Nos.3 & 4 by both ways returnable at an early date, for which, necessary steps be taken within three working days.
Office is directed to issue Dasti Summons to the learned counsel for the petitioner for service upon the opposite party Nos.3 & 4 outside the Court.
By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has submitted that the opposite party Nos.3 and 4 i.e. the Northern Railway Primary Co-operative Bank Ltd., Lucknow and the Managing Director, Northern Railways Primary Co-operative Bank Ltd., Lucknow be directed to pay the due amount in the form of gratuity of the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner retired from the post of Accountant Grade-I on 31.01.2017 and as per the Form-1 under sub-rule-1 of Rule 7 of Payment of Gratuity (Central) Rules, 1972, the total amount of gratuity is Rs.11,64,770/-.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner approached the Controlling Authority as per Section 7 of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 for claiming his amount of gratuity. The aforesaid section clearly provides that for claiming the amount of gratuity, the employee concerned should approach the Controlling Authority but by means of order dated 13.11.2017, the Controlling Authority has declined to pass any order in favour of the petitioner and returned the said application of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 of the State Government i.e. the Assistant Labour Commissioner, U.P., but the said State Authority has also declined to interfere in the case of the petitioner saying that it is beyond his jurisdiction to pass any order on the application of the petitioner.
In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this matter requires consideration.
Therefore, the opposite party Nos.3 and 4 are hereby directed to look into the matter of the petitioner and pass appropriate order, strictly in accordance with law or to show cause by the next date of listing as to why the admissible amount of the gratuity of the petitioner has not been paid till date.
List this case in the week commencing 21.05.2018 as fresh.
In the meantime, the opposite parties may file their respective counter affidavits. Since counsel for the opposite party No.1 has raised objection regarding maintainability of the writ petition, therefore, it would be open to him to raise such objection by means of an affidavit before the next date of listing.
Order Date :- 25.4.2018 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]