2009 (7) TMI 763

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ereupon he was relieved from service. However, in spite of relieving him from service, the respondent-company did not settle his terminal dues. He moved the respondent-company for settling the terminal dues. According to the petitioner, terminal benefits dues are in the range of Rs. 4,71,201. The petitioner wrote a letter dated 23-9-2007, vide annexure D calling upon the respondent-company to settle the dues. This letter was replied by the respondent-company on 28-9-2007, vide annexure E. Later on, several communications were exchanged between the petitioner and the respondent-company. Ultimately, the petitioner got issued a legal notice dated 5-12-2007, vide annexure H. This was replied by the respondent-company on 12-12-2007, vide annexur....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... admitted by the respondent-company as dues, payable towards terminal benefits come to Rs. 1,65,692. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the admission made by the respondent-company stating that it is due in a sum of Rs. 1,85,000 towards terminal benefits payable, the conduct of the respondent-company in withholding the payment entails the consequence as provided under the provisions of the Act and the petitioner is justified in initiating these proceedings. 5. Counsel for the respondent-company contends that though an admission with regard to the liability of the company in a sum of Rs. 1,85,000 is made, the said admission is not an unqualified admission inasmuch as the company had made it clear that the amount ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mount of Rs. 1,85,000 to be paid includes the gratuity amount is not clear. Be that as it may. Since this is an admitted sum, the respondent-company cannot avoid its liability only on the ground that the proceedings are pending before the competent authority. The petitioner who has undeniably worked under the respondent-company is entitled for the admitted amount to sustain himself. 7. As regards other amounts claimed by the petitioner, the same is disputed and the petitioner has to recover the same by resorting to other remedies available to him in law. The petition under section 433 is not a remedy for such dues. Even as regards the admitted amount since the proceedings are pending before the Controlling Officer the payment of this amoun....