Hemchandra Hari Narkhede vs MSEDCL Advocate - Dharmaraj Vinayak Jadhav — 119/2022

Case under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Section 7. Disposed: Contested--JUDGMENT on 11th March 2026.

Appln.PGA - Appln PGA

CNR: MHLC120010022022

Case disposed

Filing Number

1002/2022

Filing Date

21-12-2022

Registration No

119/2022

Registration Date

29-12-2022

Court

Labour Court, Pune.

Judge

1-Judge, 1st Labour Court, Pune.

Decision Date

11th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGMENT

Acts & Sections

Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 Section 7

Petitioner(s)

Hemchandra Hari Narkhede

Adv. Akshay Kurapati

Respondent(s)

MSEDCL Advocate - Dharmaraj Vinayak Jadhav

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Judge, 1st Labour Court, Pune.

11-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

Judgment

18-02-2026

Admission of Document

16-02-2026

Final Argument

02-02-2026

Final Argument

Final Orders / Judgements

11-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The First Labour Court, Pune ruled in favor of a retired Executive Engineer and ordered Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. to release Rs. 33,25,860 in gratuity benefits plus accrued interest. The court held that gratuity cannot be withheld merely because a criminal case is pending against the employee; it can only be forfeited under specific circumstances under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, none of which applied here since the applicant retired on superannuation after completing departmental proceedings with only a minor penalty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The First Labour Court, Pune ruled in favor of a retired Executive Engineer and ordered Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. to release Rs. 33,25,860 in gratuity benefits plus accrued interest. The court held that gratuity cannot be withheld merely because a criminal case is pending against the employee; it can only be forfeited under specific circumstances under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, none of which applied here since the applicant retired on superannuation after completing departmental proceedings with only a minor penalty. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Labour Court, Pune. All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case