Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Chattisgarh High Court

Hazru Ram Halba vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 7 September, 2023

    Neutral Citation
    2023:CGHC:22465

                                                                      NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                   Writ Petition (S) No.441 of 2023

     Hazru Ram Halba, S/o Shri Ram Singh, aged about 69 years, R/o
     Village and Post - Gangrel, Ward No. 03, Tahsil and District -
     Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

                                                              ---- Petitioner

                                 Versus

  1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Water Resources
     Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur,
     Chhattisgarh

  2. The Collector Dhamtari District - Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

  3. Executive   Engineer Water Resources Department, Water
     Management Division Rudri, Code No. 38, Tahsil and District
     Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

                                                          ---- Respondents

_____________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate.

For State : Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel Order On Board 07/09/2023

1. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was working as skilled labour under Respondent No.3 since 01.01.1997 and after attaining the age of superannuation, he was retired on 31.05.2015. A partial payment of the gratuity has been made and further payment was withheld. The Petitioner preferred a petition before the Court of Controlling Authority under Gratuity Act, 1972, in which order dated 06.10.2021 has been passed holding that the Petitioner is entitled to receive total amount of Rs.5,70,565/- with interest. The above mentioned order has not been challenged by Respondent No.3, subsequent to that, Recovery Revenue Certificate (RRC) under Section 8 of payment of Gratuity Act has also been issued. However, Respondent No.2 has not taken any action on the same. Hence, appropriate orders be passed.

2. Learned Counsel appearing for the State/Respondents opposes the Neutral Citation 2023:CGHC:22465 submission made by learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

3. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. After considering on the submissions, this petition is disposed of. There is no dispute that the Petitioner has given his services as skilled labour and after his retirement, complete payment of gratuity has not been made to him. The order passed by the Controlling Authority has attained finality and the Revenue Recovery Certificate is also pending before Respondent No.2. Hence, the petition is disposed of. Respondent No.2 is directed to expedite the proceedings on the Revenue Recovery Certificate and conclude the same, at the earliest, within a time limit of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/-

(Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge Shubham