- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42202 WP No. 35477 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 35477 OF 2024 (L-PG) BETWEEN: MUTHOOT FINCORP LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT MUTHOOT CENTRE, PUNNEN ROAD, TIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. AJAY NAZARENE A., WORKING AS CHIEF MANAGER COMPANY REG. UNDER COMPANY ACT, 1956. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHISHIRA AMARNATH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. MR. GAJANAN N.SHETTY, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. 4, 1ST FLOOR, BLOCK A, KALBURGI PRESTINE APARTMENT, MAYURI EXTENSION NAGSETTI, KOPPA HOBLI, HUBLI, KARNATAKA - 580023. 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 AND ASSISTANT LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL), OFFICE OF THE DY.CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) SHRAM SADAN YESHWANTHPUR INDUSTRIAL SUBURB II STAGE GORAGUNTEPALYA, TUMKUR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560022. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T.P.MUTHANNA, ADVOCATE FOR R1) Digitally signed by THEJAS KUMAR N Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42202 WP No. 35477 of 2024 THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR HEARING ON INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Shishira Amarnath., counsel for the petitioner and Sri.T.P.Muthanna., counsel for respondent No.1 have appeared in person. 2. The order dated 17.04.2024 passed by the Controlling Authority vide Annexure-A is called into question in this Writ Petition on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of Writ Petition. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. 4. Counsel for the petitioner in presenting his arguments vehemently contended that the petitioner was unable to prefer the statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority within the statutory period due to circumstances beyond its control. He argued by saying that the Appellate Tribunal has limited power regarding condonation of delay, - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42202 WP No. 35477 of 2024 hence the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and assailed the order of the Controlling Authority. Hence, he submits that an appropriate order may be passed. The issue falls within a narrow compass and relates to the order passed by the Controlling Authority and the exercise of power under Writ jurisdiction. It is noted that the applicant Gajanan N.Shetty filed application under sub-section 4 of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 to pay the gratuity together with interest on the gratuity for the delay in payment. The Controlling Authority vide order dated 17.04.2024 allowed the application and directed the Managing Director, Muthoot Fincorp Limited to pay the applicant the gratuity amount of Rs.3,71,525/- together with simple interest @ 10% per annum from the date of entitlement i.e., 01.06.2022 till the date of actual payment. Suffice it to note that as against the order passed by the Controlling Authority, a statutory remedy of filing an appeal lies before the Appellate Authority. The contention that the petitioner could not prefer the statutory appeal before the Appellate Authority within the - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:42202 WP No. 35477 of 2024 statutory period due to circumstances beyond its control cannot be accepted. It is significant to note that Article 226 is not intended to circumvent statutory procedures. When a right or liability is created by a statute which itself prescribes the remedy or procedure for enforcing the right or liability, resort must be had to that particular statutory remedy before seeking the discretionary remedy under Article 226. The law is also well settled that a petition under Article 226 should not be entertained unless the statutory remedies are ill-suited to meet the demands of an extraordinary situation. Hence, I decline to exercise power under writ jurisdiction. 5. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Because of dismissal of the petition, pending interlocutory applications if any are disposed of and interim direction if any stands discharged. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE TKN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 52