Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(SC) 292

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra, JJ.
SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES – Appellant
Versus
GURSEWAK SINGH AND OTHERS – Respondent
Civil Appeal Nos. 3150 and 3151 of 2019 (Arising Out of SLP(Civil) Nos. 7627 and 7628 of 2019); Diary No. 41825 and 41829 of 2018
Decided on : 15-03-2019

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, ASG Mr. R. Balasubramanian, Adv. Mr. V.V.V. Pattabhiram, Adv. Mr. P.V. Yogeswaran, Adv. Nachiketa Joshi, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Chadha, Adv. Mr. Risabh Jain, Adv. Mr. Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR
For the Respondent: Mr. Bharat Sangal, AOR (Amicus Curiae) Ms. Babita Kushwaha, Adv. Ms. Isha Gupta, Adv. Ms. Anindita Deka, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Gramin Dak Sewak shall be outside Civil Service of Union and shall not claim to be at par with servants of Government.
(2) No Gratuity is payable if an Extra-Departmental Agent quits agency on his own.

Headnote:(A) Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 – Sections 2(e) and 4 – Entitlement of Gramin Dak Sewak to get gratuity – Gramin Dak Sewaks must have an independent means of livelihood – Gramin Dak Sewaks are engaged on a part-time basis for a maximum of 3 to 5 hours a day – Gramin Dak Sewak is not an employee under 1972 Act – Gramin Dak Sewak shall be outside Civil Service of Union and shall not claim to be at par with servants of Government – Gramin Dak Sewaks are engaged as Extra Departmental Agents, a post governed by 2011 Rules – These Rules have a separate provision for payment of Gratuity to Extra Departmental Agents. (Para 7.2 and 9.4)
       (B) Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2011 – Rule 6(11) – Entitlement of Gramin Dak Sewak to get gratuity – Resignation from service – No Gratuity is payable if an Extra-Departmental Agent quits agency on his own – As a consequence of his resignation, Respondent became disentitled from payment of Gratuity under statutory 2011 Rules applicable to Gramin Dak Sewaks. (Paras 10.1 and 10.2)
       Facts of Case:
       Whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is an ‘employee’ as per Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act, and is entitled to payment of Gratuity under this Act and whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is eligible for payment of Gratuity upon voluntary resignation under 2011 Rules?
       Findings of Court:
       As a consequence of his resignation, Respondent No. 1 became disentitled from the payment of Gratuity under statutory 2011 Rules applicable to Gramin Dak Sewaks.
       Result : Appeals allowed.

JUDGMENT

Indu Malhotra, J.

Leave granted in both the special leave petitions.

2. A common question of law arises in both the appeals which are being disposed of by a common judgment. The facts in Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices v. Gursewak Singh & Ors. are being considered as the lead case.

3. The present Civil Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 01.12.2017 passed by a Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in LPA No. 1612 of 2017.

4. The factual matrix of the case, briefly stated, is as under:

4.1. On 26.06.1991, Respondent No. 1 was engaged as a Gramin Dak Sewak i.e. an Extra-Departmental Agent, to work on a part-time basis in the Postal Department at Faridkot, Punjab.

4.2. In 2014, Respondent No. 1 voluntarily resigned from the said part-time job. On 28.08.2014, the Department accepted the resignation, and Respondent No. 1 was discharged with immediate effect.

4.3. Respondent No. 1 approached the Controlling Authority-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner, Central Jalandhar, seeking gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (herein after referred to as "the 1972 Act").

4.4. The Appellant - Department took the stand that Respondent No. 1 was not entitled to ex-gratia gratuity under the Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct & Engagement) Rules, 2011 as he had voluntarily resigned from the job. The Controlling Authority-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner, Central Jalandhar, vide Order dated 21.09.2015, allowed the claim of Respondent No. 1 and directed the Department to pay an amount of Rs. 1,06,021/- along with Interest @ 10% p.a. from 28.08.2014.

4.5. The Department filed an Appeal u/S. 7(7) of the 1972 Act, against the Order dated 21.09.2015 before the Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central) Kendriya Sadan, Chandigarh.

The Appellate Authority vide Order dated 17.05.2016 dismissed the Appeal filed by the Appellant - Department, and upheld the Order dated 21.09.2015 passed by the Controlling Authority-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner, Central Jalandhar.

4.6. The Department filed C.W.P. No. 11412 of 2017 before the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh under Article 226/227 of the Constitution against the Order dated 17.05.2016.

The learned Single Judge vide Order dated 23.05.2017 dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the Department relying upon earlier judgments passed by the same High Court in Senior Superintendent of Post Officers, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar v. Darshan Ram (through LRs) & Ors., 2014 (9) SCT 120 (DB) and Senior Superintendent of Post Officers v. Smt. Sham Duiari & Ors, 2006 (3) SCT 577

4.7. The Department challenged the Order dated 23.05.2017 passed by the Single Judge by way of LPA No. 1612 of 2017 before the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh.

The division bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh on 01.12.2017, dismissed the LPA filed by the Department on the ground that SLPs filed against the earlier judgments had been dismissed by this Court. As a consequence, the judgment of the learned Single Judge did not warrant interference.

4.8. The Department has filed the present Appeal to challenge the Judgment and Order dated 01.12.2017 passed by a division bench of the High Court.

5. We have heard the learned ASG Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee for the Appellant - Department. Mr. Bharat Sangal, Advocate was appointed as Amicus Curiae vide Order dated. 10.12.2018 to represent the interest of the Respondents who did not appear, despite service being effected on them.

We have perused the pleadings and written submissions filed by both parties.

6. The issues which arise for consideration are as follows:

6.1. Whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is an 'employee' as per Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act, and is entitled to payment of Gratuity under this Act?

6.2. Whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is eligible for payment of Gratuity under the 2011 Rules upon voluntary resignation?

7. The learned ASG appearing on behalf of the Department submitted that:

7.1. The Gramin Dak Sewaks constitute a unique department of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(SC) 292

IMPORTANT POINTS(1) Gramin Dak Sewak shall be outside Civil Service of Union and shall not claim to be at par with servants of Government.(2) No Gratuity is payable if an Extra-Departmental Agent quits agency on his own.

Cases Referred (2)

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Gramin Dak Sewak shall be outside Civil Service of Union and shall not claim to be at par with servants of Government.
(2) No Gratuity is payable if an Extra-Departmental Agent quits agency on his own.