Full Text
Translation output
i
>
5..
% 28.08.2009
Present:- Mr. Nalin Tripathi, ASC and Mr.i Mukesh Gupta and
Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocates for the petitioner.
None for the respondents.
+ W.P.(C.) Nos. 8322/2009. 6207/2008, 6208/2008, 6209/2008. 6219/2008. 753/2009. 1762/2009. 7166/2009, 7217/2009. 7260/2009. 6856/2009. 7276/2009, 7659/2009, 7756/2009, 7946/2009 & 7700/2009
*
All these writ petitions are proposed comnnon order because they all raise determination whether the employees of prior to 22.07.2005 are entitled for gratu
Gratuity Act, 1972 or not.
The Controlling Authority as well as their separate orders passed against ,each of the employees involved in these writ petitions has held that the employees of MCD who had retired prior to 22.07.2005 are entitled for gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 because the MCD was granted exemption from applicability of the provisions of the Payment of
Gratuity Act, 1972 vide notification -dated 22.07.2005 w.e.f.
06.08.2005.
This Court has already confirmed the decision of the
Controlling Authority as well as of the Appellate Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 vide its order dated 06.07.2009 in
W.P.(C.) No. 9052/2009. The question involved in these writ to be disposed of by this a comnrion question for the MCD who had retired ity under the Payment of the Appellate Authority in
2009:DHC:7612
I
M petitions is squarely covered by the judgnnent of this Court in the afore-mentioned case.
In that view of the matter, I do pot find any infirmity or
>
5..
% 28.08.2009
Present:- Mr. Nalin Tripathi, ASC and Mr.i Mukesh Gupta and
Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocates for the petitioner.
None for the respondents.
+ W.P.(C.) Nos. 8322/2009. 6207/2008, 6208/2008, 6209/2008. 6219/2008. 753/2009. 1762/2009. 7166/2009, 7217/2009. 7260/2009. 6856/2009. 7276/2009, 7659/2009, 7756/2009, 7946/2009 & 7700/2009
*
All these writ petitions are proposed comnnon order because they all raise determination whether the employees of prior to 22.07.2005 are entitled for gratu
Gratuity Act, 1972 or not.
The Controlling Authority as well as their separate orders passed against ,each of the employees involved in these writ petitions has held that the employees of MCD who had retired prior to 22.07.2005 are entitled for gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 because the MCD was granted exemption from applicability of the provisions of the Payment of
Gratuity Act, 1972 vide notification -dated 22.07.2005 w.e.f.
06.08.2005.
This Court has already confirmed the decision of the
Controlling Authority as well as of the Appellate Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 vide its order dated 06.07.2009 in
W.P.(C.) No. 9052/2009. The question involved in these writ to be disposed of by this a comnrion question for the MCD who had retired ity under the Payment of the Appellate Authority in
2009:DHC:7612
I
M petitions is squarely covered by the judgnnent of this Court in the afore-mentioned case.
In that view of the matter, I do pot find any infirmity or
perversity in the orders of the Controlling Authority or of the
Appellate Authority that may call for an in exercise of its extraordinary discretiona
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. These writ petitions, therefore, fail and are hereby dismissed.
Needless to say that any miscellaneDus application pending in any of these writ petitions stand dispos infructuous.
Acopy of this order be kept in the fi
:erference by this Court in
"y writ jurisdiction under ed of as having become les of all the writ petitions which have been disposed of by this common order.
AUGUST 28, 2009
•bsr'
S.N.AGGARWAL, J
2009:DHC:7612
Appellate Authority that may call for an in exercise of its extraordinary discretiona
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. These writ petitions, therefore, fail and are hereby dismissed.
Needless to say that any miscellaneDus application pending in any of these writ petitions stand dispos infructuous.
Acopy of this order be kept in the fi
:erference by this Court in
"y writ jurisdiction under ed of as having become les of all the writ petitions which have been disposed of by this common order.
AUGUST 28, 2009
•bsr'
S.N.AGGARWAL, J
2009:DHC:7612
JUDGMENT