The State of Karnataka and The Deputy Director Amrutha Mahal Thali Samvardhara Kendra vs Smt. Muniyamma, Late R. Kumar, The Assistant Labour Commissioner And Controlling Authority Appointed Under Gratuity Act, Chickmagahur and The Deputy Labour Commissioner And Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1971, Hassan District Hassan

Ram Mohan Reddy

Petitioners aggrieved by the order dated 31.03.2009, Annexure - A, of the Controlling Authority under the Payment of the Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short ''Act'') preferred an appeal to the Appellate Authority, which when rejected by an order dated 07.09.2009, Annexure- B has resulted in this petition.

Respondents though served are absent unrepresented.

There is force in the submissions of the learned Government Counsel for the petitioners that in the absence of arraigning the first petitioner as a party to the proceedings before the authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act, the orders impugned are a nullity, more go having reading to the decision of a Division Bench of the Court in Assistant Executive Engineer vs. J. Mahadevaiah And Another - ILR KAR 225.

That decision though rendered in the context of definition of the terms "workmen and "employer" under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? nevertheless, applying equally to the definition of the term "employer" u/s - 2(f) of the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972, being almost similar. Hence, the State of Karnataka represented by the Secretary of the department is a necessary and proper party to the proceedings under the Act.

In that view of the matter, the petition is allowed, The orders of the authorities under the Act are quashed and the proceeding remitted to the controlling authority for a consideration afresh, after arraigning the first petitioner as a party - respondent therein, extending treasonable opportunity of hearing, including the filing of statement of objections to the claim petition, framing of issues, recording of evidence and thereafter to pegs an order strictly in accordance with law.