GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT* *W.P. 9129/2021* St.Joseph College of Engineering Vs. R.Vijayarajaj & Anr Dated: 09.04.2021 *Hon’ble Justice Vaidyanathan* dismissed the Writ Petition and directed the Appellate Authority to entertain Appeal if filed by the Petitioner herein after compliance of

*GLIMPSE OF A LATEST VERDICT*

*W.P. 9129/2021*
St.Joseph College of Engineering Vs. R.Vijayarajaj & Anr
Dated: 09.04.2021

*Hon’ble Justice Vaidyanathan* dismissed the Writ Petition and directed the Appellate Authority to entertain Appeal if filed by the Petitioner herein after compliance of deposit as per the order of the Controlling Authority in this matter relating to *“Deposit of Gratuity”* and further held the following:

i) Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act r/w Rule 18, more particularly Rule 18 (5) of the Tamil Nadu Payment of Gratuity Rules, 1973, is very clear that the Appellate Authority has power to consider the request of the parties concerned to lead additional evidence in order to render a substantial Justice.
ii) This Hon’ble Court held that if the petitioner fails to deposit the amount of gratuity within the stipulated time, then the Appeal itself is incompetent in the matter of Onward Trading Company, Madras Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Madras reported in [1989 (2) LLN 672] and the same was cited here.