Back
SANDEEP V. MARNE
Anil Govind Ganu – Appellant
Versus
Innovative Technomics Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. These two petitions are filed by the ex-promoters and directors of first Respondent-Company raising grievance about non- payment of gratuity. They have challenged orders passed by the Controlling Authority-cum-Labour Court dated 6 December 2018 rejecting their Application PGA Nos. 10/2015 and 11/2015. The orders of the Controlling Authority are confirmed in Appeal by the Appellate Authority-cum-Industrial Court vide judgments and orders dated 10 July 2023, which are also subject matter of challenge in the present petition.
2. Petitioners founded the Company ‘Innovative Technomics Private Limited’ and were its Directors. Petitioner-Anil Govind Ganu claims that during the period from 26 March 1993 to 16 October 2012, he worked for the Company as its employee. His last drawn salary was Rs.8,60,000/-. It is also claimed that Petitioner- Ashwini Anil Ganu worked for the Company from 1 January 1996 to 3 October 2010 and drew salary as an employee. Her last drawn salary was Rs.3,00,000/-. Petitioners claimed that in the annual accounts for the year ending 31 March 2012, a
Directors may not claim gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act if in control of the company unless explicitly outlined in a binding agreement.
The court affirmed that the controlling authority can determine the employer-employee relationship for gratuity claims, establishing that IIT Bombay was liable for gratuity payments to contract emplo....
Interpreting Act unequivocally indicate that payment of gratuity would not depend upon employee filing an application before employer demanding gratuity but will have to be paid immediately on cessat....
The Payment of Gratuity Act allows claims for both statutory and contractual gratuity to be adjudicated under the same authority, ensuring employee rights are protected.
The Gratuity Act provides overriding rights for gratuity claims that cannot be denied unless specifically exempted by law, even when alternative welfare benefits exist.
The liquidator is not obligated to pay gratuity to ex-employees post-acquisition of the corporate debtor as the claims become infructuous.
The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 overrides contractual agreements, ensuring gratuity eligibility is determined by statutory provisions rather than settlement terms.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
