Renuka 2-WP-2490-2020.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2490 OF 2020 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO. 97695 OF 2020 The Chairman And Managing Director Uco Bank and Anr ...Petitioner V/s. Dhiren Mohanlal Thanki and Ors ...Respondents ________________ Mr. Ashok D. Shetty with Ms. Rita K. Joshi (through VC) and Mr. Bushra A. Moughal for Petitioner. Mr. Vijay P. Vaidya with Mr. Mahendra Agvekar with Ms. Shraddha Chavan for Respondent No. 1. Mrs. Shehnaz V. Bharucha for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4. ________________ CORAM: SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. DATED: 6 AUGUST 2026. P.C.: 1) The Petition challenges order dated 9 September 2019 passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (PG Act) dismissing Appeal preferred by the Petitioner-Bank and conBrming the order of the Controlling Authority dated 17 March 2017. By the impugned order, the Petitioner is directed to pay gratuity of Rs. 10 lakh to the Respondent alongwith interest at the rate of 10% per annum from 31 May 2014. Page No. 1 of 4 6 August 2026 2026:BHC-AS:32638 Renuka 2-WP-2490-2020.docx 2) I have heard, Mr. Shetty, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. Vaidya, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1 and Mrs. Bharucha, the learned counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4. 3) Respondent No. 1 has been removed from service as a measure of penalty on 22 March 2014. The order of removal has attained Bnality on account of dismissal of Writ Petition No. 497 of 2019 on 25 March 2026. It appears that the Bank declined to pay gratuity on the ground that removal was premised on misconduct involving moral turpitude. 4) I have gone through the charges levelled against Respondent No. 1. The broad frame of the chargesheet was that there was a customer of the Bank operating his account from Collaba Branch, which was merged in Madam Kama Branch Mumbai. At that time, Respondent No. 1 was Senior Manager of Collaba Branch. He later got transferred to JVPD Branch of the Petition-Bank. It is alleged in the chargesheet that though Madam Kama Branch was at a proximate distance, the customer still continued having dealings with JVPD Branch where Respondent No. 1 was posted. It is alleged that the staff at JVPD Branch acted negligently in discounting the bills presented by the customer. It is alleged that Respondent No. 1 was at the helm of affairs at JVPD Branch. Thus irregularities in sanctioning of the bill discounting in respect of the customer were ascribed to the Respondent No. 1. The charges are ultimately proved and the dismissal order is also upheld by Page No. 2 of 4 6 August 2026 Renuka 2-WP-2490-2020.docx this Court. The only issue is whether there is an element of moral turpitude in misconduct proved against Respondent No. 1. 5) Mr. Shetty, would submit that Respondent No. 1 committed misconduct of misappropriation and that his actions caused loss to the Bank. While cause of loss to the Bank can be accepted, in the facts of the present case, it is difBcult to conclude that Respondent No. 1 misappropriated any amounts of the Bank. He may have been negligent in disbursing amounts towards bill discounting. However, there is no allegation in the chargesheet that Respondent No. 1 was in hand in gloves with the borrower or that he received any pecuniary advantage to himself. The case thus involves misconduct of negligence in performance of duties. It therefore, cannot be concluded that removal of the Respondent No. 1 was owing to misconduct involving moral turpitude. The Controlling and Appellate Authorities have rightly upheld entitlement of Respondent No. 1 to gratuity. Writ Petition is devoid of merits and deserves to be dismissed. 6) It appears that at the time of preferring its appeal, Petitioner-Bank has deposited principal amount of gratuity of Rs. 10 lakh on 4 July 2017. Respondent No. 1 has already withdrawn the principle amount of gratuity on 15 November 2019. In my view, therefore, the interest liability of Bank is required to be restricted only from 31 March 2014 to 4 July 2017. Accordingly, the Petitioner-Bank shall pay over to Respondent No. 1, the amount of interest on principal amount of gratuity of Rs. 10 lakh in respect of period from 22 March 2014 to 4 July 2017 within outer limit of two months. If any interest has accrued on the Page No. 3 of 4 6 August 2026 Renuka 2-WP-2490-2020.docx principal amount of gratuity deposited with the Controlling Authority, the Registry of the Controlling Authority shall pay the accrued amount of interest to Respondent No. 1. 7) Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 8) Pending Interim Application is also disposed of. [SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.] Page No. 4 of 4 6 August 2026 Signed by: Renuka S Thakur Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 07/08/2026 14:47:34