ORDER 1. LEAVE GRANTED. 2. THE RESPONDENT FILED THE WRIT PETITION CHALLENGING THE REFUSAL OF THE APPELLANT TO PAY ANY GRATUITY OR OTHER RETIRAL BENEFITS TO THE RESPONDENT DESPITE THE FACT THAT HE HAD RETIRED ON 1-11-1986. THE DISPUTE WAS INITIALLY FILED BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT. THE APPELLANTS PLEA THAT THE GRATUITY WAS NOT PAID BECAUSE THE WORKMAN HAD NOT GIVEN EITHER STORE CLEARANCE OR HAD NOT VACATED THE QUARTERS WAS REJECTED BY THE LABOUR COURT. THE APPELLANT WAS DIRECTED TO PAY THE GRATUITY AFTER DEDUCTING THE STORE AMOUNT, WITH FULL SALARY FOR THE PERIOD SUBSEQUENT TO THE DATE OF THE RESPONDENTS SUPERANNUATION AND OTHER CONSEQUENTIAL BENEFITS AND ALSO PAY RS 500 BY WAY OF COSTS. THE WRIT PETITION FROM THIS ORDER WAS DISMISSED BY THE HIGH COURT. 3. IN OUR VIEW, THE LABOUR COURT ERRED IN TREATING THE RESPONDENT TO BE IN SERVICE EVEN AFTER THE DATE OF SUPERANNUATION MERELY BECAUSE THE GRATUITY HAD NOT BEEN PAID. THE RELIANCE BY LEARNED COUNSEL APPEARING ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT ON THE NOTIFICATION DATED 15-7-1982 IS MISPLACED. THAT NOTIFICATION READS AS UNDER: "(1) THE MANAGEMENT SHALL PAY THE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY TO A RETIRING WORKMAN AS MAY BE FOUND DUE TO HIM BY THE MANAGEMENT ON RECEIPT OF A CLEARANCE SLIP FROM THE WORKMAN IN RESPECT OF ARTICLES OF STORES, ADVANCE, ETC. THE WORKMAN SHALL SIMULTANEOUSLY VACATE HIS QUARTERS AND HAND OVER ITS POSSESSION TO THE MANAGEMENT. (2) THE RETIRING WORKMAN SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE IN SERVICE AND SHALL BE ENTITLED TO FULL WAGES AND ALL FRINGE BENEFITS AS LONG AS THE EMPLOYER DOES NOT TENDER THE DUE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY TO HIM. (3) RECEIPT OF PAYMENT OF THE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY FOUND DUE BY THE EMPLOYER SHALL NOT PREJUDICE THE RIGHT OF THE WORKMAN TO RAISE A DISPUTE ABOUT IT, IF HE CONSIDERS THE AMOUNT DISPUTABLE EVEN ON VACATION OF THE QUARTERS AND EXIT FROM THE SERVICE. (4) THIS ORDER SHALL APPLY TO ALL WORKMEN COVERED BY THE WAGE BOARD FOR THE SUGAR INDUSTRY AND SHALL REMAIN IN FORCE TILL 31-12-1983." 4. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT BY VIRTUE OF CLAUSE (1), THE EMPLOYEE WAS REQUIRED TO VACATE HIS QUARTERS SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY BEING PAID TO HIM. THE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY IS ALSO PAYABLE SUBJECT TO THE CLEARANCE SLIP BEING GIVEN IN RESPECT OF THE ARTICLES OF STORES, ADVANCE, ETC. IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT BY VIRTUE OF CLAUSE (1), THE EMPLOYEE WAS REQUIRED TO VACATE HIS QUARTERS SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH THE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY BEING PAID TO HIM. THE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY IS ALSO PAYABLE SUBJECT TO THE CLEARANCE SLIP BEING GIVEN IN RESPECT OF THE ARTICLES OF STORES, ADVANCE, ETC. IT APPEARS FROM THE LABOUR COURTS AWARD THAT NO SUCH CLEARANCE SLIP HAS BEEN GIVEN BY THE RESPONDENT NOR HAD THE QUARTERS BEEN VACATED. IT WAS ONLY IF ALL THE CONDITIONS WERE SATISFIED AND THE, PAYMENT OF GRATUITY WAS NOT MADE, THAT CLAUSE (2) WOULD COME INTO OPERATION, AND THE EMPLOYEE WOULD BE DEEMED TO BE IN SERVICE. BUT IN THE ABSENCE OF FULFILMENT OF THE CONDITIONS AS PRESCRIBED IN CLAUSE (1), CLAUSE (2) WOULD NOT OPERATE. 5. THE LABOUR COURT ERRED IN NOT TAKING NOTE OF THE FACT THAT THERE WAS NO QUESTION OF PAYMENT OF GRATUITY UNDER THIS NOTIFICATION UNLESS THE EMPLOYEE HAD GIVEN A CLEARANCE SLIP AND VACATED THE QUARTERS. FURTHER AND IN ANY EVENT, IT WAS MADE CLEAR BY THE FOURTH PARAGRAPH OF THE NOTIFICATION THAT THE NOTIFICATION WOULD REMAIN IN FORCE ONLY TILL 31-12-1983 WHEREAS THE RESPONDENT RETIRED ON 1-11-1986. THE DECISION OF THE LABOUR COURT CANNOT THEREFORE, BE SUSTAINED. 6. PURSUANT TO AN INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY THIS COURT, THE APPELLANT HAS DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT WHICH THE APPELLANT CLAIMED TO BE THE GRATUITY PAYABLE TO THE RESPONDENT. ACCORDING TO THE APPELLANT, IT HAS DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT PAYABLE BY WAY OF GRATUITY TWICE: ONCE BEFORE THE LABOUR COURT AND ONCE PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF THIS COURT. IN ADDITION, IT HAS ALSO PAID THE AMOUNT CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF THE RESPONDENT BEING IN SERVICE SUBSEQUENT TO THE DATE OF THE SUPERANNUATION. THE RESPONDENT DISPUTES THAT THE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN DEPOSITED ON THIS ACCOUNT AND CLAIMS A LARGER AMOUNT. 7. WE, HOWEVER, DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL BY SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER AND DIRECTING THE APPELLANT TO WITHDRAW THE UNDISPUTED AMOUNT DUE TO THE RESPONDENT AND TO PAY THE SAME TO HIM IMMEDIATELY UPON HIS VACATING THE QUARTERS IN QUESTION. THE QUARTERS SHALL BE VACATED WITHIN A PERIOD OF FOUR WEEKS FROM DATE. IN DEFAULT OF THE EMPLOYEES VACATING THE QUARTERS IT WOULD BE OPEN TO THE AUTHORITIES TO HAVE HIM EVICTED THERE FROM. THE QUARTERS SHALL BE VACATED WITHIN A PERIOD OF FOUR WEEKS FROM DATE. IN DEFAULT OF THE EMPLOYEES VACATING THE QUARTERS IT WOULD BE OPEN TO THE AUTHORITIES TO HAVE HIM EVICTED THERE FROM. IT WILL ALSO BE OPEN TO THE WORKMAN TO RECEIVE THE AMOUNT TENDERED BY THE APPELLANT WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO HIS RIGHTS AND CONTENTIONS AS TO THE QUANTUM OF GRATUITY AND WILL BE AT LIBERTY TO CLAIM THE BALANCE AS PER HIS CALCULATIONS FROM THE APPELLANT. IF ANY SUCH AMOUNT IS FOUND DUE IT MAY BE PAID TO THE RESPONDENT THROUGH HIS ADVOCATE-ON-RECORD OR DIRECTLY TO THE RESPONDENT, AS IS CONVENIENT. 8. THE CIVIL APPEAL IS, ACCORDINGLY, DISPOSED OF. THERE SHALL BE NO ORDER AS TO COSTS.