Back
JYOTI SINGH
Irfan Ali – Appellant
Versus
Urdu Academy – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)
C.M. APPL. 25219/2023 (exemption) In W.P.(C) 6403/2023
C.M. APPL. 25575/2023 (exemption) In W.P.(C) 6503/2023
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. Applications stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) 6403/2023, W.P.(C) 6503/2023, W.P.(C) 9797/2021, W.P.(C) 9931/2021, W.P.(C) 12641/2021, W.P.(C) 12657/2021 and W.P.(C) 13590/2021
3. Present writ petitions have been filed by the Petitioners seeking directions to the Respondents to implement the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2009 (No. 47 of 2009) w.e.f. 03.04.1997 and release the amounts towards payment of Gratuity to the Petitioners from the date of their respective retirements.
4. Facts are in a narrow compass. Petitioners in the aforesaid writ petitions were appointed as full time TGTs/PGTs (Punjabi) or TGTs/PGTs (Urdu) or Assistant Teachers respectively, in the Punjabi Academy or Urdu Academy, as the case may be and after serving for several years retired on attaining the age of 60 years. Since the appointments of the Petitioners were on contract basis, they were not given the benefit of Gratuity at the time of their leaving the service.
5. On 31.12.2009, amendment was made in the definition of
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the amended definition of the word 'employee' under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, covers contract-based Teachers, entitling them to claim....
Part-time employees, including Vocational Part-Time Teachers, are entitled to Gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, as per the court's interpretation and judgments in similar cases.
Benefits for Payment of Gratuity to Vocational Part-Time Teachers - Act does not draw a distinction between a fulltime employee/a part time employee/ad-hoc employee etc and does not speak of any spec....
Part-time vocational teachers are entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act as they fall within the definition of 'employee' post-amendment, despite arguments regarding their temporary e....
The court established that the definition of 'employee' under the Payment of Gratuity Act includes the petitioner, entitling him to gratuity despite state claims of exclusion.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the teacher was entitled to claim gratuity under The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and the Repealing Act did not affect her right to do so.
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
