Labour Dispute and Gratuity Payment: Supreme Court Directs Expedited Resolution

The case of Pandurang Dnyandev Hankare vs. Rajshree Shahu Government Servants Co-operative Bank Ltd. revolves around a labour dispute concerning the payment of gratuity. The appellant, Pandurang Dnyandev Hankare, approached the Supreme Court after an interim order from the High Court deferred final relief pending the decision in the writ petitions. The Supreme Court had to determine whether interim relief should be granted and if gratuity payments should be made while the writ petitions remained pending.

Background of the Case

The appellant, an employee of Rajshree Shahu Government Servants Co-operative Bank Ltd., claimed gratuity payments due to him. The dispute initially reached the Labour Court, which ruled on the matter. However, the High Court issued an interim order in Writ Petition Nos. 4961/2014 and 4963/2014, directing that any decision taken by the Labour Court would be subject to the final outcome of the writ petitions.

Aggrieved by this order, the appellant approached the Supreme Court, seeking directions for immediate payment of the undisputed portion of gratuity while the case remained under consideration in the High Court.

Legal Issues

The Supreme Court examined the following legal issues:

• Whether an interim order deferring gratuity payment was justified when a portion of gratuity was undisputed.
• Whether the pending writ petitions in the High Court should be expedited.
• What interim relief, if any, should be granted to the appellant.

Arguments by the Petitioner (Pandurang Dnyandev Hankare)

The appellant, through his counsel, argued:

• That the payment of gratuity was a statutory obligation under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
• That at least the undisputed portion of gratuity should be released immediately.
• That the delay in gratuity payment was causing undue hardship to the appellant.
• That the Labour Court had already ruled on the matter, and the bank was unjustly delaying the payments.

Arguments by the Respondent (Rajshree Shahu Government Servants Co-operative Bank Ltd.)

The respondent bank, represented by its counsel, countered with the following arguments:

• That the matter was still pending before the High Court, and any payment should be subject to the final verdict.
• That the Labour Court’s decision was under challenge and should not be acted upon until the writ petitions were resolved.
• That the bank was willing to comply with the High Court’s directives but opposed interim relief.

Supreme Court Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the appellant’s request for partial relief. The key observations made by the Court were:

• The High Court was directed to dispose of the pending writ petitions within six months from the receipt of the Supreme Court’s judgment.
• The respondent bank was ordered to disburse the gratuity payable to the appellant up to October 15, 1993, within two weeks from the date of the judgment.
• The payment of gratuity was without prejudice to the contentions available to the respondent bank in the pending High Court proceedings.

Observations of the Supreme Court

The Court emphasized:

“In the above circumstances, we are of the view that the matters pending before the High Court need to be disposed of. Accordingly, these appeals are disposed of with a request to the High Court to dispose of the writ petitions expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.”

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s ruling strikes a balance between ensuring statutory rights of employees and respecting judicial proceedings. The Court acknowledged the appellant’s right to gratuity while ensuring that the respondent’s legal defenses were not prejudiced. This decision reinforces the principle that statutory dues should not be withheld unnecessarily, even when broader legal challenges are pending.

The case underscores the importance of timely disposal of labour disputes and provides clarity on interim relief in gratuity claims, setting a precedent for future cases involving similar issues.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Pandurang Dnyandev H vs Rajshree Shahu Gover Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 16-08-2017.pdf