IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.3001 of 2016 Paradeep Port Trust, Jagatsinghpur …. Petitioner Mr. P. K. Nanda, Adv. -versus- Sudersan Aruk & others …. Opposite Parties Mr. D. K. Sahoo, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MISHRA Order No. ORDER 16.07.2025 12. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode. 2. Mr. Nanda, learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits, the writ petition has been preferred by the Management Challenging the order dated 11th September, 2015 passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (shortly, the Act, 1972) so also the Assistant Labour Commissioner, (Central), Bhubaneswar under Section 7(7) of the Act, 1972 confining to awarding of 10% interest in favour of the Opposite Party No.1-workman. Mr. Nanda further submits, in a similar issue, at the instance of a co-workman namely, Gagan Bihari Prusty, the Supreme Court, vide order dated 03.03.2025 passed in SLP(C) No.4468 of 2022 (Gagan Bihari Prusty Vs. Paradip Port Trust and others) allowed the said petition with an observation that the Petitioner would be entitled to get interest @10% per annum on the amount of gratuity. Mr. Nanda files xerox copy of the said order passed in SLP(C) No.4468 of 2022 in the Court, which be kept on record. 3. Mr. Nanda further submits, in view of the said order passed by the Supreme Court, the Management of Paradeep Port Trust has instructed him not to pursue the present writ petition. He further submits, since 6% interest has already been paid to the Opposite Party No.1-workman in terms of the impugned orders, the remaining 4% of interest shall be paid to him within a period of two months from today. 4. It is pertinent to mention here that, this Court, relying on earlier judgments of the Supreme Court on similar issue, so also statute, in M.D., Odisha State Co- operative Bank Ltd., Bhubaneswar Vrs. Prafulla Chandra Patnaik & others, reported in 2025 (I) ILR- CUT-1314 also took a similar view regarding payment of interest @ 10% per annum instead of 6% per annum. 5. However, in view of the above mentioned submissions made by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner so also settled position of law, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the Petitioner –Management to pay the remaining 4% of interest on the gratuity to the Opposite Party No.1-workman within a period of two months from today. 6. Since the Opposite Party No.1-workman is yet to appear in this case, Office is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Opposite Party No.1 for his information and necessary action. Mona (S. K. MISHRA) JUDGE