Appellate authorities lack jurisdiction to condone delays exceeding 121 days under Section 7(7) of the Gratuity Act.

Respondent No. 1 claimed gratuity for service rendered from 28 January 1988 to 30 April 2022.

The Controlling Authority, by order dated 10 October 2023 in Gratuity Case No. 44 of 2023, directed the petitioner to pay ₹6,82,016 with interest at 10% per annum.

The petitioner contended that the respondent’s service had to be calculated in two periods, namely, service as a Karyakar from 1985 to 2007 and service as Mukhya Sevika from 7 September 2007 until superannuation.

The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 after a delay of 502 days and sought condonation of delay.

The Deputy Labour Commissioner rejected the appeal on 1 July 2025 on the ground of limitation.

The petitioner consequently invoked the writ jurisdiction of the Gujarat High Court to challenge both orders.

Whether the Appellate Authority was justified in rejecting the petitioner’s appeal as time-barred despite the petitioner’s explanation for the 502-day delay.

Whether, under Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, the Appellate Authority had jurisdiction to condone delay beyond the statutory period of 60 days plus a further 60 days.

The Court primarily applied Section 7(7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, which permits an appeal against an order under Section 7(4) within 60 days from receipt of the order and authorises the appropriate Government or Appellate Authority to extend that period by a further 60 days upon satisfaction that sufficient cause prevented timely filing.

The Court held that this provision prescribes a mandatory outer limit—stated by the Court as 121 days—for filing an appeal and does not confer jurisdiction on the Appellate Authority to condone delay beyond that limit.

The Court also referred to earlier decisions of the Gujarat High Court, including the decision in Special Civil Application No. 10769 of 2026 and the Larger Bench decision in Special Civil Application No. 12147 of 2013.

The Court found that the petitioner’s appeal was filed after a delay of 502 days, far beyond the statutory period of 60 days and the permissible further extension of 60 days under Section 7(7).

Consequently, irrespective of whether the petitioner had offered a satisfactory explanation for the delay, the Appellate Authority lacked jurisdiction to condone delay beyond the statutory outer limit.

Since an appeal filed after that period was legally not maintainable, the rejection of the appeal by the Deputy Labour Commissioner was consistent with Section 7(7).

The Court therefore did not examine the petitioner’s substantive challenge concerning the calculation of gratuity in detail.

The petition was dismissed for lack of merit; the order dated 1 July 2025 rejecting the appeal was upheld, and the interim relief, if any, was vacated. Rule/notice, if any, was discharged.