IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
L.P.A.No.143 of 2009
Narendra Narayan Singh 'Nalin'. ... ... ...Appellant(s)
-Versus-
1. Central Coalfields Limited, Darbhanga House, Ranchi.
2. Regional Labour Commissioner (Central), Dhanbad.
3. Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Hazaribagh.
4. Project Officer, Religarha Colliery, Central Coalfields Limited,
Hazaribagh. ... ... ... ... ... ...Respondent(s)
------------
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.K.SINHA
For the Appellant(s): M/s. Akhil Kumar Sinha & Deepak
Kumar, Advocates.
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Ananda Sen, Advocate.
------------
03/ 14.10.2009
This appeal has been preferred against the order dated
13.02.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S)No.1063 of
2004 by which the writ petition was dismissed and consequently the plea
of the petitioner-appellant herein claiming balance amount towards
payment of gratuity was rejected.
In order to explain the controversy, it is worth while to state that the
petitioner had filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge that his
date of joining in the service of the Respondent- C.C.L. was 01.02.1962
but the Respondent-Authority had wrongly recorded his date of entry into
the service as 01.12.1965 and therefore the amount towards gratuity
should have been calculated by taking his entry into the service on
01.02.1962 and not 01.12.1965.
On perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Single
Judge as also after hearing the Counsel for the parties, it could be noticed
that the petitioner-appellant although had challenged the date in regard to
his entry into the service as 01.12.1965, he had not produced a chit of
paper to indicate that his date of joining in service was 01.02.1962. On the
contrary, the Counsel for the Respondent-C.C.L. explained that the entire
papers on record indicate that the petitioner-appellant had entered into the
service of the Respondent-C.C.L. on 01.12.1965 and hence all the retiral
benefits were computed by computing the service period from 01.12.1965.
Since the petitioner-appellant had failed to produce any
documentary evidence in support of his claim that he had entered into the
service on 01.02.1962, the Respondent cannot be blamed to have wrongly
computed the gratuity amount payable to the petitioner-appellant by taking
the date of his entry into the service as 01.12.1965. The Counsel for the
appellant, however, submitted that he had succeeded before the Assistant
2.
Labour Commissioner, who had held that the appellant had entered into
the service on 01.02.1962. But we fail to understand as to how the
authority before whom no chit of paper was produced to indicate that he
had entered into the service on 01.02.1962 could pass an order in favour
of the appellant contrary to the record of the Respondent-Employer.
The appellant having failed to establish the date of his entry into the
service of the Respondent-Organization as 01.02.1962, his claim towards
payment by way of gratuity by taking his entry into the service as 1.2.1962
has rightly not been entertained.
The appeal thus has no substance and hence it is dismissed at the
admission stage itself.
[Gyan Sudha Misra, C.J.]
[D.K.Sinha,J.]
P.K.S./S.B.