Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation Vs Deputy Labour Commissioner & Others (Karnataka High Court)
Summary: Karnataka High Court partly allowed Bangalore Metropolitan Transport Corporation’s writ petition challenging orders of the authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act which had determined Rs.1,41,388 as the difference in gratuity payable to a retired workman. The workman had joined the Corporation as a driver on 3 December 1976 and voluntarily retired on 21 August 2005. In 2010, he approached the Controlling Authority claiming differential gratuity, which was determined at Rs.1,41,388 with 10% interest from 22 September 2005. The Appellate Authority affirmed that determination.
Before the High Court, BMTC contended that various outstanding loans and advances availed by the workman were deductible and that only Rs.19,980 remained payable. The Court noted that the workman had outstanding amounts aggregating Rs.1,21,408 comprising loans from the BMTC Co-operative Society and Consumer Society, marriage advance, Syndicate Bank TVS loan, UCO Bank loan and URD amount. It held that these advances were deductible from gratuity on the basis of an undertaking given by the employee. Consequently, out of the differential gratuity of Rs.1,41,388 determined by the Controlling Authority, the workman was entitled only to the balance amount of Rs.19,980.
The High Court set aside the orders of both gratuity authorities and directed payment of Rs.19,980 with interest at 10% per annum from 8 April 2010, the date on which the workman filed his application, until 8 September 2012, when the Corporation made the deposit before the Appellate Authority. The Corporation was directed to comply with the order within six months.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
The petitioner in this writ petition has called in question both the orders of the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act determining the difference in gratuity payable to respondent No.3 at Rs.1,41,388/-.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as ‘the Corporation’ and ‘the Workman’.
3. Brief facts of the case leading to filing of the writ petition are that:
The workman joined the services of the Corporation as a driver on 03.12.1976 and retired on seeking voluntary retirement on 21.08.2005. After his retirement the workman was paid gratuity that he was entitled to according to the Corporation.
4. In the year 2010, the workman filed an application before the Controlling Authority seeking difference in gratuity. The Controlling Authority by his order dated 30.07.2012 determined the difference in gratuity payable to the workman at Rs.1,41,388/- along with 10% interest from 22.09.2005 till the date of payment.
5. The Corporation having challenged the same before the Appellate Authority, the Appellate Authority by its order dated 24.02.2015 affirmed the order of the Controlling Authority. It is the aforesaid orders that are challenged in this writ petition.
6. Heard Smt.H.R.Renuka, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Sri.R.Srinivasa Gowda, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Learned counsel for workman has remained absent throughout.
7. Learned counsel for the Corporation would submit that the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority have grossly erred in determining the payment of gratuity at Rs.1,41,388/-, as the workman was paid all the entitled gratuity when he had retired and at best the difference payable after reduction of loan and liabilities of the workman was Rs.19,980/- as he had availed various loans.
8. The admitted facts are, the workman joined the service on 03.12.1976 and retired on 21.08.2005 and had rendered active service of 27 years 8 months and 18 days and was paid gratuity after his retirement.
9. The Controlling Authority though has determined the difference in gratuity payable to the workman at Rs.1,41,388/-, the workman had availed various loans in the Corporation which are as follows:
| (i) | Loan from BMTC Co-operative Society | Rs. 11,285/- |
| (ii) | Loan from BMTC Consumer Society | Rs. 20,000/- |
| (iii) | Marriage Advance | Rs. 19,005/- |
| (iv) | Syndicate Bank TVS loan | Rs. 45,000/- |
| (v) | Uco Bank BSK Branch | Rs. 20,400/- |
| (vi) | URD Amount | Rs. 5,718/- |
| Total: | Rs.1,21,408/- |
10. Hence, the respondent-workman would be entitled to a remainder of the amount after deduction of the aforesaid advances that are availed by the employee, which on an undertaking given by the employee was deductible from gratuity. Therefore, the workman would be entitled to Rs.19,980/- which is the remainder of the amount out of Rs.1,41,388/- determined by the Controlling Authority along with interest at 10% per annum from the date of filing of the petition by the workman on 08.04.2010 till the deposit is made by the Corporation before the Appellate Authority i.e., on 08.09.2012.
Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) Writ petition is allowed in part.
(ii) The order of the Controlling Authority bearing No.ALCB-1/PGA/CR/05/2010-11 dated 30.07.2012 and the order of the Appellate Authority bearing No.DLCB-2/PGA/CR/25/2014 dated 24.02.2015 are set aside.
(iii) The workman is entitled to difference in gratuity of Rs.19,980/- along with interest at 10% per annum from the date of filing of the petition by the workman on 08.04.2010 till the date of deposit i.e., 08.09.2012.
(iv) The aforesaid order shall be complied with by the Corporation within six months from the date of receipt of this order. 10.1
