IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 161 of 2026 ================================================================ STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH EXECUTIVE ENGINEER Versus PRAHLADBHAI JAVAHARBHAI KOLI PATEL & ORS. ================================================================ Appearance: MS AGNEYA MANKAD, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Date : 09/01/2026 ORAL ORDER 1. Present petition is led by the petitioner – State of Gujarat against the order dated 30.06.2025 passed by the respondent No.2 - Appellate Authority, Ahmedabad under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter be referred to as “the Act”) in Gratuity Appeal No. 97 of 2024, whereby, the learned Appellate Authority has rejected the appeal led by the petitioner and con rmed the order dated 28.10.2024 passed by the respondent No.3 – Controlling Authority, Ahmedabad in Gratuity Case No. 261 of 2024, whereby, the learned Controlling Authority has granted the bene ts of gratuity to the respondent No.1 herein amounting to Rs.2,015/- from 01.02.2024 till realization. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that, the respondent-workman had joined the o6ce of the petitioner as daily wager on 01.01.1982 and superannuated on 30.04.2015. That, the total span of service of the respondent-workman was 33 years. That, at the time of retirement, the O6ce of the petitioner paid gratuity of 220 years as per the provisions of Gujarat Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 2002 at Rs.2,13,587/-. That, the respondent herein had led a Writ Petition, being Special Civil Application No. 7585 of 2023, before p. 2 this Court with a prayer to release the bene ts of encashment of 300 days of unveiled leave as envisaged in the GR dated 17.10.1988 and also for a direction to revise the pension as well as gratuity, taking the date of initial appointment as the date of computation for the purposes of such bene ts. That, this Court, vide order dated 28.04.2023, had directed to extend the bene ts of 300 days of privilege leave to the petitioners and also revised pensionary bene ts, including the terminal bene ts in the case of the petitioners, and recompute the pension and pensionary bene ts by counting the service of the petitioners from the initial date of appointment. That, this Court, vide order dated 28.04.2023, had directed to pay revised pensionary bene ts to the applicant within a period of Eight weeks from the date of the order. Therefore, the o6ce of the petitioner, vide Cheque No. 849893 of State Bank of India, has paid an amount of Rs. 3,09,675/- towards arrears of gratuity within limits of 33 years of service of Rs.1,09,885/- and Rs.1,99,790/- for Leave Encashment to the respondent No. 1. That, as per the say of the respondent No. 1, he had worked for 33 years, therefore, the respondent No. 1 made an application seeking bene ts of gratuity by lling up Form-I before the petitioner. That, respondent No.1 was already paid the gratuity for 22 years and in due course, the respondent No.1 was entitled to receive remaining gratuity within limit of 33 years of service as per the Government norms. However, the respondent No.1 made an application seeking gratuity for total 33 years, before the o6ce of the Controlling Authority by lling up Form-N. That, the petitioner on 16.04.2024 led Written Statement before the Authority in Gratuity Case No.261 of 2024. The learned Authority vide order dated 28.10.2014 granted the bene ts of gratuity to the respondent No.1 herein amounting to Rs.2,015/-. Being aggrieved with the same, the p. 3 petitioner preferred an appeal being Gratuity Appeal No. 97 of 2024, whereby, the learned Appellate Authority has rejected the appeal and con rmed the order dated 28.10.2024. 3. Being aggrieved and dissatis ed with the aforesaid orders dated 30.06.2025 and 28.10.2024 passed by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 respectively, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. 4. Heard Ms. Agneya Mankad, learned Assistant Government Pleader, appearing for the petitioner. 5. Though various grounds have been raised in the memo of petition, the fact remains that the total amount involved in the petition is only Rs.2,015/-, which is a very small amount. Considering the smallness of amount, this Court deems it t not to exercise jurisdiction under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, without entering into the merits of the matter only on the ground of smallness of amount with a further clari cation that this may not be considered as precedent in other matters, the petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. 6. The petitioner is directed to deposit the amount of gratuity as awarded by the Controlling Authority and the same shall be disbursed in favour of the respondent-workman, after verifying his bank details and after following due procedure, through RTGS/NEFT, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of order of this Court. (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) Dolly