9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rties found that the claim petition is not accompanied by the application for condonation of delay, nor the claim petition shows any sufficient cause for making delayed claim. The said older of the Controlling Authority was called in question by the legal representatives of the deceased workman. The Appellate Authority allowed the appeal holding that, no separate application is necessary for condoning the delay and observed that the Controlling Authority has power to condone the delay. Accordingly, allowed the claim petition and directed the Corporation to pay the balance of the claim to the tune of ₹ 57,483/ along with interest 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that, as per the claim petition, the deceased workman clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appeal on merit and further submitted that the said order of the Appellate Authority is illegal and contrary to Rule 7 and 10 of the Rules. 5. Learned Counsel for the legal representatives of the respondent No. 2 submitted that, Rule 7 only requires that a claim has to be made to the employer within stipulated time. If it is not made, the claimant has to show the cause for delayed application. There is no provision, which requires that the claimant to make a separate application for condonation of delay under Rule 7. He relied on Rule 10 and submitted that the power is conferred on the Controlling Authority to condone the delay, if the Controlling Authority finds sufficient cause, it can condone the delay. He further submitted that, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng of Rule 7 shows that, an application is required to be made to the employer for payment of gratuity and even in case of delay, the employee is entitled to make an application showing the sufficiency of cause. Rule 7 does not by itself require a separate application to be made to the employer. However, in the case of delayed claim, the employee is required to show sufficient cause in order to entertain an application for the said claim. Rule 7 Sub-rule (1) specifically says that an application for claim of gratuity has to be made within 30 days. If 30 days' limitation is prescribed, the delayed claim can be entertained only on showing sufficient cause for the delay and in consonance with the same, Rule 7 Sub-rule (5) requires, that th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation under Rule 10 is required to be made in Form 'N' and if that application is made beyond the period prescribed under Rule 10, an application showing sufficient cause is required to be made. This aspect of the matter is considered by the Bombay High Court relying on the judgment of the Apex Court at para-23 wherein it is held, in the absence of condoning the delay, the Controlling Authority to deal with the application on merit could be one without jurisdiction. The Bombay High Court has relied on a judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of Gagandeep Pratishthan Pvt. Ltd. v. Mechano. 10. In this case, learned Counsel appearing for the legal representatives of the respondent No. 2 does not dispute that, except claim petitio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
