JUDGMENT : B.P. Das, J. - The case of the Petitioner is that while working as Deputy General Manager (T), OSFC, he retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.7.2006. After his retirement when the OSFC did not release the gratuity and leave salary, the Petitioner made a representation on 15.9.2006 to the Managing Director, OSFC, vide Annexure-1 where after he was asked by the Chief Vigilance Officer of the O.P. by his letter dated 21.9.2006 (Annexure-2) to get a clearance from the S.P., Vigilance to the effect that No. enquiry and/or charges are pending against him in the case arising out of Cuttack Vigilance P.S. Case No. 5 dtd.19.2.2004 and Bhubaneswar Vigilance P.S. Case No. 36 dtd.28.5.2003. According to the Petitioner, the O.P. has released all his retrial benefits except gratuity amounting to Rs. 2,13,375. Having failed to get the gratuity, the Petitioner has approached this Court. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the O.P. taking a stand that since two vigilance cases are pending against the Petitioner, he is not entitled to get the gratuity amount of Rs. 2,50,000 in view of the amendment made to Regulation 5 of the O.S.F.C. (Payment of Gratuity to Employees) Regulations keeping a provision to bring down the gratuity amount to the original level of Rs. 1.00 lakh. After amendment, Rule-5, as published in the Orissa Gazette dated 3rd September, 2005, which was produced by Mr. C.A.Rao, taught Counsel, reads as follows: 5. Amount admissible - Without prejudice to the provisions of Regulation 4, the amount of gratuity admissible to an employee shall be: a sum equal to one month's pay last drawn for each completed year of service in the Corporation subject to a maximum of fifteen month's payer Rs. 2.50 lakhs whichever is less. It is further indicated in the Notification that: The above amendment shall be deemed to have come into force with effect from the 30th July, 2005 subject to the condition that the operation of amendment of gratuity limit will remain in force till completion of implementation period of VRS and after VRS the proposal shall be submitted to the Govt. to bring down the gratuity limit to the original level of Rs. to bring down the gratuity limit to the original level of Rs. 1.00 lakh till the Corporation turns around and starts making profit.'' As to pendency of vigilance cases against the Petitioner, this Court by its order dated 12.8.2008, looking at the Police Papers filed by the Petitioner, found that No. charge sheet was filed against the Petitioner, for which as an interim measure, it directed the O.P. to pay a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 to the Petitioner within seven days from the date of production of the certified copy of the order which is stated to have been complied with. 3. Now in course of hearing, fact remains the same and No. charge sheet has been filed against the Petitioner. So non-payment of gratuity on the plea of pendency of vigilance cases No. longer survives. Now the sole question remains to be decided whether the Petitioner is entitled to get a sum of Rs. l,00,000 or Rs. 2,50,000 as per the amendment of Regulation 5 of the O.S.F.C. (Payment of Gratuity to Employees) Regulations, as indicated hereinbefore. In paragraph-8 of the counter affidavit, the O.P. has taken the following stand. 8 The amount of Rs. 1.00 lac was substituted by amount of Rs. 2.50 lac w.e.f. 30.07.2005 as per the amendment to the Gratuity Regulation-5 in pursuance to the decision of the Board of directors of the Corporation, which is subject to the condition that the operation of amendment of gratuity limit will remain in force till completion of implementation of VRS and after which the proposal shall be submitted to the Government to bring down the gratuity limit to the original level of Rs. 1.00 lac till the corporation turns around and start making profit. The VRS period was in force till 12.3.2006. It is pertinent to mention here that, it is crystal clear from Annexure-5 to the writ petition (Page-14) that the employees who retired from the corporation service in between 30.7.2005 to 12.3.2006 have received gratuity on the enhance limit of Rs. 2.50 lac, but again the employee retired after 12.03.2006 received at the original level of Rs. 1.00 lac. Since the grant of gratuity to the Petitioner is withheld due to evaluation of rendering meritorious service in the corporation which depends on the decision of the vigilance cases pending against him, the question of gratuity amount of Rs. 2,13,375 as alleged does not arise. 1.00 lac. Since the grant of gratuity to the Petitioner is withheld due to evaluation of rendering meritorious service in the corporation which depends on the decision of the vigilance cases pending against him, the question of gratuity amount of Rs. 2,13,375 as alleged does not arise. On a query from this Court, Mr. C.A.Rao, Learned Counsel for the O.P., submits that the amending provision of Regulation 5 is still in vogue and only a proposal has been submitted to the Government for further amendment of Rule-5 in order to bring down the gratuity limit to the original level of Rs. 1.00 lakh and the same is still pending with the State Government. 4. After considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we have No. hesitation to say that as the amended Rule 5 is still in vogue, the Petitioner is entitled to get the gratuity amount subject to the maximum of fifteen months' payer Rs. 2,50,000, whichever is less, as indicated in the Notification dated 3rd September, 2005, which remains in force even as on today. Therefore, the O.Ps. are directed to compute the gratuity of the Petitioner and pay the same, after deducting the amount of Rs. 1,00,000 already paid within one month from the date of communication of this order. The writ petition is accordingly allowed to the aforesaid extent. I. Mahanty, J. 5. I agree. Final Result : Allowed