1 / 3 2026:CGHC:14797 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7257 of 2024 • Smt. Shilpa Behra W/o Late Shri Vikram Behra Aged About 38 Years D/o Late Manohar Lal, Aged About 38 Years R/o Simran City Fase- 5, Tikrapara Raipur District- Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. The Collector Dhamtari District- Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) 3. The Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat Kurud District- Dhamtari (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondents-State For Respondent No. 3 : : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer Ms. Shailja Shukla, Advocate S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 30/03/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :- “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records from the office of the respondent in respect of petitioner’s claim. 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 3 to pay gratuity amount Rs. 2,80,098 with interest. 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 to recover gratuity amount as per order 01.03.2024 passed by controlling authority from respondent No. 3.” PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that mother of petitioner namely Late Smt. Tara Bai was under employment of Respondent No. 3, she stood retire from the post of Safai Kamgar on 31.01.2016. At the time of retirement, mother of petitioner was getting a salary of Rs. 28,800 per month. After retirement, she was paid sum of Rs. 3,65,734 towards gratuity, whereas, she was entitled for Rs. 7,14,462. As the entire amount of gratuity has not been paid, petitioner submitted an application under Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (henceforth called as “Act of 1972”) before Controlling Authority under the Act of 1972. The application submitted by petitioner was allowed and the gratuity of sum of Rs. 7,14,462 has been computed and after adjustment of the amount already paid towards gratuity, the employer has been held liable for making payment of balance amount of Rs. 3,48,728 to be paid to petitioner along with simple interest @ 10% from 01.03.2016 to 01.03.2024 of Rs. 2,48,982, making total payable amount of gratuity with interest to be paid to petitioner as Rs. 6,27,710. When the amount as computed by the Controlling Authority is not paid to petitioner or deposited with the concerned authority, petitioner submitted an application under Section 8 of the Act of 1972. After receipt of application under Section 8, the Controlling Authority issued certificate under Section 8 to Respondent No. 2 for recovery of amount of gratuity computed as land revenue on 07.08.2024, however, till date the Collector has not concluded the proceedings in terms of Section 8 of the Act of 1972. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents would oppose the submission of learned counsel for petitioner. 3 / 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. On 28.09.2013, the Secretary, State of Chhatisgarh, Panchayat and Rural Development Department issued a letter in which there is specific direction issued for making payment of gratuity to the retired employees and the liability of the same is upon the employer. 6. Be that as it may, in the case at hand, Respondent No. 3 is the employer. It is for the Collector to comply with the directives issued by the Controlling Authority under the provisions of Section 8 of the Act of 1972. When there is specific order of the Controlling Authority of Recovery Revenue Certificate (RRC) in favour of petitioner. Collector is not to adjudicate the matter but is only required to comply with the directive issued by the Controlling Authority under the provisions of Section 8 of the Act of 1972. 7. In the facts of the case, where the Controlling Authority has issued a Certificate forwarding to Collector on 07.08.2024 but even after lapse of nine months proceedings have not been concluded, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing Respondent No. 2 to conclude proceedings as forwarded to him by the Controlling Authority under Section 8 of the Act of 1972, in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a further period of 04 months from the date of receipt of order passed by this Court. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge pwn