AIDEM VENTRUES PVT LTD vs DARSHAN PITALE

Judgment text excerpt

906, 907 & 18_WP_14900 & 15266_25.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 14900 OF 2025 Aidem Ventures Pvt. Ltd. … Petitioner vs. Darshan Pitale … Respondent AND WRIT PETITION NO. 15266 OF 2025 Aidem Ventures Pvt. Ltd. … Petitioner vs. Deepak Sharma … Respondent Mr. Anand Pai a/w. Mr. Sahil Gandhi, Ms. Riddhi Shah and Ms. Triveni Jawale, i/b. Markand Gandhi & Co. for petitioner in both petitions. Ms. Sonal Rane a/w. Mr. Suraj Bansode for respondents in both petitions. CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J DATE : 21st NOVEMBER, 2025 ORDER: . These petitions are filed by the same petitioner-Company against ex-employees. The petition arises out of concurrent orders passed by the Controlling Authority (Labour Court) and Appellate Authority (Industrial Court), under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (Gratuity Act). Both the authorities have concurrently held that the petitioner-Company was not justified in forfeiting gratuity payable to the respondents, by taking recourse to Section 4(6)(b)(ii) of the Gratuity Act and accordingly, while allowing the applications of the respondents, a direction has been issued to the petitioner-Company to pay the gratuity with simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum, till payment of such amounts. 1/8 906, 907 & 18_WP_14900 & 15266_25.doc 2. Mr. Anand Pai, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-Company in both these petitions, submitted that the concurrent orders passed by the two authorities below, deserve interference, for the reason that the acts of the respondents, as alleged by the petitioner-Company, amounted to acts of moral turpitude and hence, the petitioner-Company was justified in forfeiting the gratuity by taking recourse to Section 4(6)(b)(ii) of the Gratuity