Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI
Bindra Prasad Patel – Appellant
Versus
State Of UP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Ashwani Kumar Mishra, J.)
1. This intra court appeal arises out of a composite judgment passed by learned Single Judge in a bunch of writ petitions, including Writ-A No.5588 of 2023, whereby petitioner’s claim for payment of gratuity is rejected.
2. The petitioner-appellant in the present case was employed as Headmaster in a junior high school. He (petitioner) received National Teachers’ Award which entitled him to two years extension in service. The age of superannuation was otherwise 62 years under the applicable rules. As such, the appellant has superannuated on 31.3.2017 after availing session’s benefit at the age of 64 years. The writ petition came to be filed by the appellant with the prayer to direct the District Basic Education Officer, Prayagraj to release gratuity to him alongwith interest. It is this claim which came to be rejected by the learned Single Judge.
3. In order to appreciate the controversy raised in the matter it would be necessary to refer to the background in which the dispute has arisen. The State of Uttar Pradesh enacted U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1972’) primarily for establishing a Board of Basic Educat
Teachers in basic institutions governed by state rules are not considered employees under the Gratuity Act, denying them gratuity benefits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the payment of gratuity for teachers in the Basic Education Department is governed by specific Government Orders, and petitioners must plead f....
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.
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....
The court held that the petitioner-institution is liable to pay gratuity and leave encashment to respondent-employees for their service period, as per the applicable rules and acts.
Employees of aided educational institutions are entitled to gratuity for their entire service period, as per the applicable rules and acts.
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....
Service matter - Payment of a gratuity - Rule 5 of these Rules provided that a gratuity equal to six times pay last drawn by a teacher at time of his death would be payable provided he had put in not....
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
