1989 PLP 363 (PLC)

Jamil Raza Zaidi for Applicant. Iqbal Habib for Respondents. Admittedly the applicant had been working as Grade‑I Officer, in the respondent Bank. It is the case of the applicant that because of unavoidable circumstances he resigned from the service of the respondent vide resignation letter dated 15‑2‑1983 Annexure B to the grievance petition. There was an exchange of correspondence between the applicant and the respondent in respect of notice pay and liabilities to be paid by the respondents to the applicant. Finally the resignation was accepted on 11‑10‑1983 and the applicant was released from the service of the bank w.e.f. 16‑3‑1983 afternoon, but such intimation was sent to the applicant on 14‑1‑1985 vide letter annexure D to the grievance petition. It is further submitted that thereafter vide letter dated 9‑3‑1985, the applicant requested the respondent bank for the payment of service gratuity amounting to Rs.25,000 only. That vide letter dated 4‑4‑1985 the respondent refused to pay the aforesaid gratuity vide letter annexure F to the grievance petition. Thereafter the applicant sent grievance notice Annexure H to the respondent bank, but the bank refused to pay the said gratuity. Accordingly the present grievance petition was filed. Reply statement was filed by the respondent bank, whereby legal objections were taken, that the applicant being an officer of Grade I was not a workman. That according to the rules of the Bank, gratuity was not to be paid to the applicant. That the grievance petition was time‑barred. On merits the claim of the applicant was denied. Applicant filed his affidavit in evidence, and produced no other witness. The respondent Bank filed affidavit in evidence of Mr. Akbar Sultan Assistant Vice‑President. After hearing both, the learned counsel, I have reached the following conclusion. Admittedly the intimation of acceptance of resignation was given to the applicant on 14‑1‑1985. Thereafter the applicant preferred his claim for payment of gratuity on 9‑3‑1985 annexure E which was turned down by the respondent bank on 4‑4‑1985. The grievance notice Annexure H was sent on 1‑7‑1985 i.e. within 3 months of the date when the claim of gratuity was refused. Hence I am of the view that the grievance petition is within time. As regards the merits of the case, at the outset it is pointed out that the applicant miserably failed to produce evidence to establish that he was performing manual or clerical job. On the other hand it is an admitted fact that he was Grade I Officer and was governed by Pay Commission Award and not by Wage Commission Award. Accordingly I am of the view that the applicant was not a workman. Further more the conduct of the applicant reveals that for the first time he preferred the claim of gratuity in the year 1985. Obviously he had tendered resignation in the year 1983, and since then there had been exchange of correspondence between the applicant and the respondent in respect of dues and liabilities. It is pertinent to note that the applicant neither in his resignation nor in the subsequent correspondence, about the dues and liabilities, did not claim the payment of gratuity. As such the applicant is also estopped from raising such claim in the year 1985. In view of the above discussion, I do not find any merits in the present grievance petition and the same stands dismissed. A.E./1308/Lb.S Petition dismissed.