Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi This the 17th day of December, 2025 Hon’ble Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

Hon’ble Sh. Rajveer Singh Verma, Member (J)

SH. SATISH KUMAR YADAV, AGED ABOUT 60 YRS, S/O SH. SAJJAN SINGH YADAV, DESIGNATION- PRESENTLY RELIEVED on 28/06/2024 FROM THE POST OF CONTRACTUAL CRAFT INSTRUCTOR (ON FULL TIME CONTRACT BASIS) (GROUP-C) FROM THE O/o ITI, PUSA, GNCTD, DELHI-110012, R/o H. NO. 163, GALI HANUMAN MANDIR WALI, HAIDER PUR VILLAGE, DELHI-110088.

....Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Varun Mudgil)

Versus

1. GNCT OF DELHI, Through Its Secretary, Delhi Secretariat, IP Estate, Delhi-110002.

2. DEPARTMENT OF TRAINING & TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GNCT OF DELHI, Through Its Secretary, Muni Maya Ram Marg, Pitampura, Delhi-110034

3. INDUSTRIAL TRAINING INSTITUTE, PUSA, GNCTD, Through Its Principal, Pusa, New Delhi-110012.

... Respondents (By Advocate: Mr. Amit Yadav)

ORDER (ORAL)

By Dr. Chhabilendra Roul, Member (A)

The present OA has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following relief:

“a) Direct the Respondents for the implementation of the Judgment, passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi dated 03/08/2021, in the matter of Janardan Sharma vs GNCT of Delhi Through It’s Chief Secretary & Ors., WP(C)/11154/2019, in true letter and spirit by the Respondents, for extending of the benefits of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 to the Applicant who worked as Contractual Craft Instructor (on full time contract basis) under the Govt, in, Pusa of the Department of Training &

Technical Education, GNCT of Delhi; &/or b) Issue an appropriate order, or direction to the Respondent No.2 & 3 to calculate and release the payment of the Gratuity as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (as amended up to date) along with interest @6% p.a., to the Applicant;

c) To award cost of the litigation to the Applicant.”

2. Factual Matrix

2.1 The present applicant joined as Full-time contractual Craft Instructor (Turner) in ITI, Pusa, New Delhi with effect from 1.1.2009. This appointment was offered on the basis of walk-in interview for which the respondents published advertisement in leading national newspapers on 31.7.2008. The contractual appointment got renewed year after year by giving breaks during the summer vacation, for each fresh academic session. The last appointment letter for such contractual appointment was issued by the respondents on

13.10.2023 which ended on 28.6.2024.

2.2 The applicant submitted an application dated 6.3.2024 to Respondent No.3 to grant him the benefit of Gratuity in terms of the statutory provision under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The respondents have not responded to his representation as yet. Being aggrieved, he has filed the present OA seeking the aforementioned relief.

3. Notices were issued to the respondents who entered appearance and filed their counter reply, to which the applicant chose not to file any rejoinder.

4. Submission by learned counsel for the applicant

4.1 The learned counsel for the applicant submits that vide amendment to the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in 2009, the Parliament amended the definition of word “employee” under Section 2 (e) of the said Act and included teachers to get the benefit of Gratuity with effect from 3.4.1997. The applicant qualified as a teacher, as his appointment letter stipulates that he is appointed as a contractual Instructor in ITI.

Instructors are teachers.

4.2 The learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the artificial breaks given to the contractual Instructors have been ignored in catena of judgments by various courts, Janardan Sharma Vs GNCT of Delhi through its Chief Secretary in WP (C) No. 11154 of 2019 [(2021) SCC Online Del 389]. In paragraph 9 of the said judgment the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi held that:

“9. From the above, it is clear that the Act does not draw a distinction between a fulltime employee / a part time employee /ad hoc employee etc. In other wo