REFERENCE

ISSUE RAISED/FACTS

HELD

1

KALEESWARA MILLS
 
VS

ASST LABOUR COMMISSIONER

2003(96) FLR 662 (HC-MAD-SB) OR 2003(1) LLJ 231

1

 2

AT THE TIME OF GRATUITY PAYMENT THE EMPLOYER EXCLUDED GRATUITY FOR THE YEARS 1984, 1985, 1987, 1989 AND 1990 ON THE GROUNDS OF THE EMPLOYMEE GOING ON STRIKE AND NOT SATISFYING THE DEFINITION OF CONTINUOUS SERVICE UNDER SECTION 2(A)(1) OF GRATUITY ACT 1972

 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER ORDERED PAYMENT AND THE MANAGEMENT CHALLENGED THE ORDER

1

2

IIF THE WORKMAN HAVE GONE ON ILLEGAL STRIKE. HE WILL NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR GRATUITY FOR THOSE YEARS OF STRIKE UNLESS HE PROVES THAT DURING EACH OF THREE YEARS HE HAS PUT IN 240 DAYS ATTENDANCE

 THE EMPLOYEE WILL HAVE TO PROVE THAT HIS ABSENCE DURING STRIKE WAS DUE TO NO FAULT OF HIS OR ELSE IT WILL AMOUNT TO INTERUPTED SERVICE AND WILL DISENTITLE HIM FOR GRATUITY DURING THE RELEVANT YEARS

2

KRISHNAVENI TEXTILE MILLS

VS

ALC (CENTRAL) MADRAS

2003(95) FLR 1164

1

 
2

WILL PARTICIPATION IN STRIKE IN VIOLATION SECTIONS 2(n) 22,23 & 24 OF ID ACT AMOUNT TO AUTOMATIC BREAK IN SERVICE UNDER SECTION 2A(1) OF THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, DISENTIITLING AN EMPLOYEE TO RECEIVE GRATUIITY FOR THAT YEAR OF STRIKE ?

 IS ISSUE OF NOTICE AND COMPLIANCE WITH PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE REQUIRED BEFORE DISENTITLING HIM ?

1  







2





3

EVEN IF THE STRIKE IS ILLEGAL OR ABSTENTION FROM DUTY IS ILLEGAL A SHOW CAUSE NOTICE SHOULD BE ISSUED TO HIM ASKING HIM TO EXPLAIN WHY HIS ABSENCE SHOULD NOT BE TREATED AS BREAK IN SERVICE

AFTER STUDYING HIS REPRESENTATION A FORMAL ORDER WILL HAVE TO BE PASSED REGARDING BREAK IN SERVICE

ONLY IF SUCH A SPEAKING ORDER IS PASSED WILL IT AMOUNT TO BREAK IN SERVICE FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTION 2(A) OF THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT

3

H GANGA HANUME GOWDA

VS

KARNATAKA AGRO IND CORP LTD

2003(1) LLJ 1119 [SC]

1  


2



3




4

GRATUITY WAS NOT PAID


WORKED SUCCEEDED IN GETTING COURT ORDER FOR PAYMENT OF GRATUITY

COURTS INCLUDING SINGLE BENCH OF HIGH COURT UPHELD NON PAYMENT OF INTEREST FOR DELAYED PAYMENT

WORKED CHALLENGED DENIAL OF INTEREST

1

2

AFTER INTRODUCTION OF SECTION 7(3-A) IN 1987 THE DISCRETIONERY POWERS OF THE AUTHORITIES TO WAIVE INTEREST PAYMENT HAS BEEN TAKEN AWAY

HENCE IN ALL CASES OF DELAYED PAYMENT OF GRATUITY (BEYOND THE DATE IT BECAME PAYABLE) WILL ATTRACT PAYMENT OF INTEREST ALONG WITH GRATUITY AMOUNT