[2025:RJ-JP:51354] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4583/2024 1. Surya Roshni Limited, Through Its General Manager (Admn.) Lighting Division, Padam Tower, Rajendra Palace, New Delhi. 2. Surya Roshni Limited, Through Its Branch Manager, 429, Ganpati Plaza, M.i.road, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus Shri Nirmal Kumar Khatri Son Of Shri Chhagan Lal Khatri, Aged About 64 Years, R/o.14, Vidhyut Abhiyanta Colony, Malviya Nagar, Sector C, Jaipur. ----Respondent Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1194/2000 1. M/s Surya Roshni Limited, Through Its General Manager (Admn.) Lighting Division, Padam Tower, Rajendra Palace, New Delhi. 2. M/s Surya Roshni Limited, Through Its Branch Manager, 35, Shastri Nagar, Shopping centre, Jaipur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. The Presiding Officer, appointed under the Shops and Commercial Establishments Act. 2. Shri Nirmal Kumar Khatri Son Of Shri Chhagan Lal Khatri, Aged About 64 Years, R/o.14, Vidhyut Abhiyanta Colony, Malviya Nagar, Sector C, Jaipur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rupin Kala For Respondent(s) : Mr. Reashm Bhargava HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 17/12/2025 1. These two writ petitions are preferred by petitioners against the respondent workman, Nirmal Kumar. [2025:RJ-JP:51354] (2 of 4) [CW-4583/2024] 2. The prayer in writ petition No.4583/2024 is reproduced as under: 1) The order dated 19.10.22. 30.05.23 and order dated 30.01.24, Annexures No.8 10 & 12 respectively passed by the Controlling Authority appointed under payment of Gratuity Act 1972 deserves to be quashed and set aside. 2) That in alternate the authority below may be directed to consider the facts and circumstances of the case and passed necessary orders if required by remanding the matter to the authority below. 3) That the petitioner company may be permitted to submit of the reply application submitted by the respondent under rule 10 (1) of the Rules of 1972. As the reply could not be submitted on account of proceedings subjudice in High Court in case No.1194/2000. 4) That the writ petition may kindly be tagged with SBCW No.1194/2000. 5) That any other order this court deems fit in facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner company. 3. The prayed in connected writ petition No.1194/2000 is also reproduced as under: [2025:RJ-JP:51354] (3 of 4) [CW-4583/2024] (a) writ petition of the petitioners be please accepted and allowed, (b) a writ of certiorari or writ of mendamus or any other writ or order be please passed in favour of the petitioners quashing and setting aside the impugned orders dated 5/8/98 and 6th October, 1999 passed by the Authority, Respondent No. 1. (c) Any other order or direction, as is deemed fit, proper and appropriate in the facts and circumstances of this case, may also please be passed in favour of the petitioners quashing impugned orders dated 5/8/98 and 6/10/99 of the Respondent No. 1. 4. During pendency of these writ petitions, the parties have entered into a settlement and a joint application is filed for disposal of these writ petitions in view of full and final settlement arrived at between the parties. 5. The settlement is sent to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court for attestation and verification and after attestation and verification the matter is placed before this Court. 6. The respondent (applicant) has accepted the terms and conditions of settlement and in lieu of settlement the petitioner M/s Surya Roshni has handed over demand draft of ₹8,50,000/- to the respondent and receipt is also placed on record. [2025:RJ-JP:51354] (4 of 4) [CW-4583/2024] 7. In view of settlement between the parties, these writ petitions are liable to be disposed of. 8. Accordingly, the writ petition Nos. 4583/2024 and 1194/2000 are hereby disposed of. 9. Misc. application, if any, stands disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J PREETI VALECHA /448-449