Bombay High Court
Shriram Kondiba Walke vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 26 August, 2021
Author: S.G. Mehare
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge, S.G. Mehare
910 to 918-wp-3040-2020.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
910 WRIT PETITION NO.3040 OF 2020
PANDHARINATH DATTATRAYA RAJGURU
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
911 WRIT PETITION NO.3047 OF 2020
PANDURANG GANPAT PALODKAR
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND
OTHERS
AND
912 WRIT PETITION NO.3859 OF 2020
SHRIRAM KONDIBA WALKE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
913 WRIT PETITION NO.4371 OF 2020
ASHOK NAMDEO SONAWANE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
914 WRIT PETITION NO.4377 OF 2020
AMRUTA PUNJAJI GADHE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
915 WRIT PETITION NO.4455 OF 2020
SHIVAJI DHONDU NIKAM
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
916 WRIT PETITION NO.4461 OF 2020
VISHNU ABARAO SOLUNKE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHERS
1/4
::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2021 09:48:28 :::
910 to 918-wp-3040-2020.odt
AND
917 WRIT PETITION NO.4518 OF 2020
SUKHDEO SAMPATRAO THOMBRE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
AND
918 WRIT PETITION NO.4696 OF 2020
BHAUSAHEB MAHADU SULTANE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. More Ashok A. AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. S.G. Sangle ...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & S.G. MEHARE, J.J. DATED : 26th AUGUST, 2021 PER COURT:-
1. We have heard Shri More, the learned advocate representing the petitioners and the learned AGPs on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 in the respective petitions.
2. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that respondent No.4 is purely a formal party and the issue in these petitions is between the petitioners and the Revenue Authorities as regards execution of the Revenue Recovery Certifcate (RRC) under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (MLRC). He, therefore, prays for leave to delete respondent No.4. Leave granted. Deletion be carried out forthwith.
3. The issue before us is as regards execution of the Revenue Recovery Certifcate issued by the competent authority in relation to the gratuity amounts, which is payable to the petitioners. Entire gratuity 2/4 ::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2021 09:48:28 ::: 910 to 918-wp-3040-2020.odt proceedings have culminated into fnal judgment. The employer of the petitioners has not challenged the judgment, which has now attained fnality.
4. We fnd from the record that the Controlling Authority as well as the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 have delivered the respective judgments quantifying the amount of gratuity payable to the petitioners. Since these judgments have attained fnality, there is no reason for us to look there beyond.
5. There can be no dispute on the legal issue that once the Revenue Recovery Certifcate is issued by the competent authority, the District Collector has to entrust the matter to a responsible revenue ofcer, who has to ensure the recovery of amounts by following the due procedure laid down under the MLRC by treating the amounts as arrears of land revenue. Needless to state, the employee's right to gratuity is well recognized and it is the obligation of the employer to make the payment of gratuity, failing which, interest can also be levied.
6. The learned AGPs appearing in the respective petitions submit that they would not canvass against the provisions of law and are aware that such amounts are treated as arrears of land revenue so as to be recovered under the MLRC. They pray for a reasonable time so as to enable respondent No.2 to initiate efective steps.
7. In view of the above, all these Writ Petitions are disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to initiate appropriate steps to recover the amounts set out in the Revenue Recovery Certifcates by following the 3/4 ::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2021 09:48:28 ::: 910 to 918-wp-3040-2020.odt procedure laid down under the MLRC. The said amounts shall be recovered on or before 31.12.2021 and would be disbursed to the petitioners promptly and preferably within 15 days from the date of recovery.
(S.G. MEHARE. J) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J) Mujaheed// 4/4 ::: Uploaded on - 31/08/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 09/10/2021 09:48:28 :::