JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. G. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner and Mr. M. Chetia, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. I have also heard Mr. N. Patiri, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.3. 2. The Petitioner herein has approached this Court challenging the orders dated 04.03.2025 and 08.05.2025 passed in LPG case No.47/2024 whereby the Respondent No.2 had arrived at the finding that the Respondent No.3 is entitled to an amount of Rs.5,77,343/- on account of gratuity and as an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- has already been paid, the Petitioner was further required to pay an amount of Rs.4,77,343/- along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date it fell due. 3. This Court while entertaining the instant writ petition and issuing notice on 19.09.2025 categorically observed that the Respondent No.3 herein is entitled to the gratuity of Rs.5,77,343/- in terms with the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short ‘the Act of 1972’) and therefore and as an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- have already been paid to the Respondent No.3 earlier, this Court directed the Petitioner to disburse the amount of Rs.4,77,343/- to the Respondent No.3 on or before 01.12.2025. 4. The only question herein which arises before this Court is as to from when the interest at the rate of statutory rate of 10% would be chargeable on the amount of gratuity payable to the Respondent No.3. 5. Mr. G. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has submitted that the Petitioner is not entitled to any interest inasmuch as, the Petitioner had approached the controlling authority after a period of five years in the year 2024. The learned counsel further submitted that at best the interest at the rate of 10% on the amount due can be calculated from the date the impugned order was passed i.e. 04.03.2025 on which date, the Controlling Authority had come to an opinion that the Respondent No.3 is entitled to an amount of Rs.5,77,343/- and out of which Rs.1,00,000/- have already been paid. 6. Per contra Mr. 6. Per contra Mr. N. Patiri, the learned counsel who represents the Respondent No.3 submitted that dehors any application filed by the Petitioner in terms of Section 7 of the Act of 1972, it is a duty entrusted upon the employer i.e. the Petitioner to make payment of the gratuity payable to the Respondent No.3/employee within 30 days from the date it is payable. The learned counsel further submitted that a perusal of Sub-Section (3A) of Section 7 of the Act of 1972 would further show that if the gratuity amount is not paid in terms with Sub-Section (3) of Section 7 of the Act of 1972, simple interest not exceeding the rate notified by the Central Government from time to time for payment of the long term deposits has to be paid. The learned Counsel therefore submitted that the amount of gratuity was payable to the Respondent No.3 w.e.f. 01.05.2019. In that regard, the learned counsel has referred to a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of H. Gangahanume Gowda Vs. Karnataka Agro Industries Corporation Limited reported in (2003) 3 SCC 40 . 7. This Court has duly heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the materials on record. 8. For the purpose of deciding the dispute in question, this court finds it pertinent to quote the provisions of Sub-Sections 1, 2, 3, 3A, 4 of Section 7 of the Act of 1972. “ 7. Determination of the amount of gratuity.- (1) A person who is eligible for payment of gratuity under this Act or any person authorised, in writing to act on his behalf shall send a written application to the employer, within such time and in such form, as may be prescribed, for payment of such gratuity. (2) As soon as gratuity becomes payable, the employer shall, whether an application referred to in sub-section (1) has been made or not, determine the amount of gratuity and give notice in writing to the person to whom the gratuity is payable and also to the controlling authority specifying the amount of gratuity so determined. (3) The employer shall arrange to pay the amount of gratuity within thirty days from the date it becomes payable to the person to whom the gratuity is payable. (3) The employer shall arrange to pay the amount of gratuity within thirty days from the date it becomes payable to the person to whom the gratuity is payable. (3A) If the amount of gratuity payable under sub-section (3) is not paid by the employer within the period specified in sub-section (3), the employer shall pay, from the date on which the gratuity becomes payable to the date on which it is paid, simple interest at such rate, not exceeding the rate notified by the Central Government from time to time for repayment of long-term deposits, as that Government may, by notification specify: Provided that no such interest shall be payable if the delay in the payment is due to the fault of the employee and the employer has obtained permission in writing from the controlling authority for the delayed payment on this ground. (4)(a) If there is any dispute to the amount of gratuity payable to an employee under this Act or as to the admissibility of any claim of, or in relation to, an employee for payment of gratuity, or as to the person entitled to receive the gratuity, the employer shall deposit with the controlling authority such amount as he admits to be payable by him as gratuity. (b) Where there is a dispute with regard to any matter or matters specified in clause (a), the employer or employee or any other person raising the dispute may make an application to the controlling authority for deciding the dispute. (c) The controlling authority shall, after due inquiry and after giving the parties to the dispute a reasonable opportunity of being heard, determine the matter or matters in dispute and if, as a result of such inquiry any amount is found to be payable to the employee, the controlling authority shall direct the employer to pay such amount or, as the case may be, such amount as reduced by the amount already deposited by the employer. (d) The controlling authority shall pay the amount deposited, including the excess amount, if any, deposited by the employer, to the person entitled thereto. (d) The controlling authority shall pay the amount deposited, including the excess amount, if any, deposited by the employer, to the person entitled thereto. (e) As soon as may be after a deposit is made under clause (a), the controlling authority shall pay the amount of the deposit – (i) to the applicant where he is the employee; or (ii) where the applicant is not the employee, to the [nominee or, as the case may be, the guardian of such nominee or] heir of the employee if the controlling authority is satisfied that there is no dispute as to the right of the applicant to receive the amount of gratuity.” 9. From a perusal of the above quoted Sub-Sections and more particularly Sub-Section (1) Section 7 of the Act of 1972 which stipulates that the employee who is eligible for payment of gratuity is required to send a written application to the employer within such time and in such form as may be prescribed for payment of such gratuity. In the instant case, no such application however was filed. Be that as it may, it is very interesting to take note of Sub-Section (2) of Section 7 of the Act of 1972 which stipulates that irrespective of such application being submitted by the employee, it is incumbent upon the employer to determine the amount of gratuity and give notice in writing to the person to whom the gratuity is payable and also to the controlling authority specifying the amount of gratuity so determined. Sub-Section (3) of Section 7 of the Act of 1972 further imposes an obligation upon the employer to make arrangement to pay the amount of gratuity within 30 days from the date it became due to the person to whom the gratuity is payable. 10. Therefore, a conjoint reading of Sub-Section (2) and Sub-Section (3) of Section 7 of the Act of 1972 enjoins a duty as well as a responsibility upon the employer to determine the amount of gratuity payable and give a notice in writing to the person to whom the gratuity is payable and also the controlling authorities specifying the amount of gratuity so determined. In this regard, it is pertinent to take note of that the Petitioner herein had determined that the Respondent No.3 was only entitled to an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and duly paid the same. 11. In this regard, it is pertinent to take note of that the Petitioner herein had determined that the Respondent No.3 was only entitled to an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and duly paid the same. 11. Now let this Court take note of Sub-Section 3A of Section 7 of the Act of 1972. A perusal of the said Sub-Section reveals that if the employer fails to make payment of the gratuity determined within 30 days from the day the gratuity was payable, a simple interest is to be payable as the rate notified by the Central Government. It is relevant to take note of that the Central Government have notified 10% as the interest rate payable. The proviso to Sub-Section 3A of Section 7 of the Act of 1972 also mandates when interest is not payable. This is very important for the purpose of adjudication of the instant proceedings. In terms of the said proviso, if the delay in payment is due to the fault of the employee and the employer had obtained permission in writing from the controlling authority for the delayed payment of on this ground, then interest is not payable. 12. In the backdrop of the above, a perusal of the facts of the instant case would show that the Respondent No.3 retired on 30.03.2019 and the Petitioner determined that the gratuity payable is Rs.1,00,000/-. The facts further reveal that the Petitioner accepted the said amount. But when the Petitioner came to learn that similarly situated teachers in other institutions have received much higher amount, the Respondent No.3 thereupon filed an application disputing the amount of gratuity paid to the Petitioner. This application was filed on 05.07.2024. The Controlling Authority i.e. the Respondent No.2 had thereupon passed the orders dated 04.03.2025 and 08.05.2025 opining that the actual gratuity amount to which the Respondent No.3 is entitled to is Rs.5,77,343/- and as an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- has already been paid, the Respondent No.3 is further entitled to an amount of Rs.4,77,343/-. It was further opined vide the impugned orders that there would be also interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date it fell due. 13. It was further opined vide the impugned orders that there would be also interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date it fell due. 13. In the opinion of this Court, the Petitioner having accepted the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- and did not raise any dispute till 05.07.2024, there was a delay which was caused by the Petitioner for actual determination of the dispute pertaining to what would be the gratuity amount payable in terms with the Act of 1972. 14. At this stage this Court finds it relevant to take note of the judgment of the Supreme Court referred to by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent No.3 i.e. in the case of H. Gangahanume Gowda (supra) in support of the contention that the Respondent No.3 is entitled to the interest from 30 days after the Respondent No.3 had retired. In the opinion of this Court, the said judgment cannot be made applicable taking into account that in the said proceedings pending before the Supreme Court, it was not the case of the employer that the delay in payment of the gratuity was due to the fault of the employee which is otherwise the case of the Petitioner in the present proceedings. 15. Accordingly, it is therefore the opinion of this Court that the impugned orders so passed by the Respondent No.2 do not require any interference save and accept slight modifications which are observed herein under: (i) This Court finds no infirmity in the impugned orders dated 04.03.2025 and 08.05.2025 passed in LPG Case No.47/2024 in deciding as regards the quantum of the gratuity payable to the Respondent No.3. It has been submitted at the Bar that the said amount have also been duly paid to the Petitioner. (ii) It is the further opinion of this Court that the Petitioner herein is entitled to interest at the rate of 10% from 05.07.2024 till the date of actual payment of the gratuity. It is submitted at the Bar that the Respondent No.3 herein would be entitled to interest of an amount of Rs.58,483/- taking into account that the principal gratuity amount have already paid on 26.09.2025. 16. It is submitted at the Bar that the Respondent No.3 herein would be entitled to interest of an amount of Rs.58,483/- taking into account that the principal gratuity amount have already paid on 26.09.2025. 16. Accordingly, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ petition thereby directing the Petitioner to disburse the amount of Rs.58,483/- to the Respondent No.3 within 15 days from the date of the present judgment and thereafter file an affidavit of compliance before the Registry of this Court on or before 30.01.2026. It is further observed that if the affidavit of compliance is not filed, the matter be again placed before this Court. 17. Interim order passed on 19.09.2025 stands vacated.