SC: Daily wager entitled for gratuity if job is regularised
AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com 30.03.2018
New Delhi: In a big relief to daily wage-earners who get regularised, the Supreme Court has ruled that such employees would be entitled to gratuity for theentire period of service and not just from the day of regularisation, as is the case now. The only catch is that they must have been in service continuously.
A bench of Justices R K Agrawal and Abhay Manohar Sapre quashed the order of the Chhattisgarh high court which had held that gratuity was to be decided on the basis of tenure of service on regular job and period of daily wage earning was not to be considered.
The HC had dismissed a plea of a state government employee, Netram Sahu, who had worked continuously for around 22 years as daily wager and thereafter his job was regularised and he worked for another three years before retirement.
The state government took the stand that the employee, working with the water resources department, could not be held eligible to claim the gratuity because out of the total period of 25 years of his service, he worked 22 years as daily wager and only three years as regular employee. It urged that he could not be said to have worked continuously for a period of five years as provided under the Act so as to make him eligible to claim gratuity.
HC agreed with the submission of the state government and refused to grant relief to the employee. He then moved the Supreme Court through his advocate Anshuman Srivastava challenging the HC’s decision.
After hearing both the parties, the apex court said that HC erred in deciding the case against Sahu and quashed the verdict.
“We do not agree with the submission of the state for more than one reason. First, the appellant has actually rendered the service for a period of 25 years. Second, the state actually regularised his services by passing the order.”
“Third, having regularised the services, the appellant became entitled to claim its benefit for counting the period of 22 years regardless of the post and the capacity on which he worked. Fourth, no provision under the Act was brought to our notice which disentitled him from claiming the gratuity nor any provision was broughtto our notice which prohibits him from taking benefit of hislong and continuous period of 22 years of service, which he rendered prior to his regularisation for calculating hiscontinuousservice of five years,” thebenchsaid.
The bench also imposed a cost of ₹25,000 on the state government to be paid to Sahu for denying him gratuity and forcing him to fight a long legal battle for seven years.
“In our considered opinion, once the state regularised his services, he became entitled to count his total period of service for claiming the gratuity amount subject to his proving continuous service of 5 years as specified under Section 2A of the Act(Payment of Gratuity Act) which, in this case, the appellant has duly proved,” it said.
PROVIDING RELIEF
AmitAnand.Choudhary@timesgroup.com 30.03.2018
New Delhi: In a big relief to daily wage-earners who get regularised, the Supreme Court has ruled that such employees would be entitled to gratuity for theentire period of service and not just from the day of regularisation, as is the case now. The only catch is that they must have been in service continuously.
A bench of Justices R K Agrawal and Abhay Manohar Sapre quashed the order of the Chhattisgarh high court which had held that gratuity was to be decided on the basis of tenure of service on regular job and period of daily wage earning was not to be considered.
The HC had dismissed a plea of a state government employee, Netram Sahu, who had worked continuously for around 22 years as daily wager and thereafter his job was regularised and he worked for another three years before retirement.
The state government took the stand that the employee, working with the water resources department, could not be held eligible to claim the gratuity because out of the total period of 25 years of his service, he worked 22 years as daily wager and only three years as regular employee. It urged that he could not be said to have worked continuously for a period of five years as provided under the Act so as to make him eligible to claim gratuity.
HC agreed with the submission of the state government and refused to grant relief to the employee. He then moved the Supreme Court through his advocate Anshuman Srivastava challenging the HC’s decision.
After hearing both the parties, the apex court said that HC erred in deciding the case against Sahu and quashed the verdict.
“We do not agree with the submission of the state for more than one reason. First, the appellant has actually rendered the service for a period of 25 years. Second, the state actually regularised his services by passing the order.”
“Third, having regularised the services, the appellant became entitled to claim its benefit for counting the period of 22 years regardless of the post and the capacity on which he worked. Fourth, no provision under the Act was brought to our notice which disentitled him from claiming the gratuity nor any provision was broughtto our notice which prohibits him from taking benefit of hislong and continuous period of 22 years of service, which he rendered prior to his regularisation for calculating hiscontinuousservice of five years,” thebenchsaid.
The bench also imposed a cost of ₹25,000 on the state government to be paid to Sahu for denying him gratuity and forcing him to fight a long legal battle for seven years.
“In our considered opinion, once the state regularised his services, he became entitled to count his total period of service for claiming the gratuity amount subject to his proving continuous service of 5 years as specified under Section 2A of the Act(Payment of Gratuity Act) which, in this case, the appellant has duly proved,” it said.
PROVIDING RELIEF
No comments:
Post a Comment