Back
RAJA BASU CHOWDHURY
Food Corporation of India – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.
1. The present writ application has been filed, inter alia, challenging the orders dated 23rd December, 2021 and 27th December, 2022 passed by the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority, under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Act”).
2. It is the petitioner’s contention that at all material point of time, the job of handling and transport of food grains and for supply of casual labourers were performed by the handling contractors. The respondent no.4 was originally appointed as contract/casual labourer under the handling contractor under a two year contract period. According to the petitioner, the respondent no.4 is not its employee and had not been employed in terms of the FCI Staff Regulation, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the “said Regulation”).
3. Notwithstanding the fact that at all material point of time, the respondent no.4 having been paid through handling contractors, and a dispute having arisen in connection with the disbursal of wages to the respondent no.4, a writ application was filed before this Hon’ble Court. The lis between the parties travelled up to the Hon’ble Supreme Court and fin
An individual who is employed for wages in connection with the work of an establishment, regardless of whether they are appointed in terms of a specific regulation, qualifies as an employee under Sec....
A person who receives wages directly from an employer, regardless of the mode of appointment, qualifies as an employee entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
Workers who are employed for wages in an establishment and have a master-servant relationship with the employer are entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, regardless of whether....
Forfeiture of gratuity under Section 4(6) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 requires a co-relation between the exception and the extent of loss or damage suffered by the employer.
The court emphasized that without a clear employer-employee relationship, liability for gratuity payments cannot be placed upon the principal employer, especially in cases involving contractors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for Authorities to consider all contentions raised by the parties and the willingness of the contractors to deposit a sum to cover ....
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
