Respondent No.1 was working as accountant with the petitioner at the relevant time. As per section 2(G) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, the opponent No.1 had filed application No.278/81 before the opponent No.2, Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act. The petitioner company also filed its written statement. After hearing the parties, opponent No.2, Controlling Authority dismissed the application of the opponent No.1. Therefore, the opponent No.1, approached the appellate Court by filing appeal No.61/82 who remanded the matter to the Controlling Authority only on the points whether the settlement was in existence or not, whether the application was barred by estoppel and whether according to settlement, the petitioner has paid the amount to opponent No.1 or not. After the remand, the Controlling Authority decided the application on merits and allowed the application as prayed for. The petitioner, therefore, challenged the said order by filing appeal No.127/83 before the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The appeal came to be dismissed . Thus, the judgment and order of respondent No.2 came to be confirmed . Hence this petition.
The respondent No.2 Controlling Authority found that principal amount of Rs.3807.60 ps. was due with interest of Rs.973.21 ps. Thus the total amount came to Rs.4780.81 ps. Cost was directed to be paid at the rate of 10 per cent of the said amount. Therefore, the Controlling Authority directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.5258.89 ps. The appellate Authority found that the respondent No.1 is not entitled to interest. Therefore, the order of the Controlling Authority with regard to interest was not confirmed in appeal. An amount of Rs.8000/- was alleged to have been paid by the petitioner to respondent No.1.
After considering the facts and circumstances emerging from the record of the present case and after hearing the learned advocates for the parties and the order recorded in Special Civil Application No.51 of 1985, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice will be satisfied if an amount of Rs.3,000/- is directed to be paid to respondent No.1 by the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to pay or deposit an amount of Rs.3,000/- by way of lump-sum final settlement in so far as the gratuity claim is concerned. The petitioner is given four weeks time to deposit the amount of Rs.3,000/-. On the amount being deposited, it will be open for the respondent No.1 to withdraw the said amount without any condition. Obviously, there would not arise any question of recovery of interest on the amount of gratuity in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
In view of the aforesaid discussions and directions, this petition stands dismissed. Rule discharged with no order as to costs.
........