Please help me with guidance on thsi urgent query. My mother has been working as a Teacher in a private – govt. recognized school is delhi for 20 years now. She’ll be retiring in March 2011. To our shock, a colleague of her’s who just retired has been refused gratuity by the school stating its not meant for School teachers but only for administrative staff. is that true? I don’t think so! Can you please guide to the Gratuity rule which clearly states that teachers too are eligible for it. manythanks, Sheena
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sheena,
Your mother is unfortunately not eligible for the payment of Gratuity. The Delhi High Court has held that a teacher, including a headmistress of a school, not being an 'employee,' will not be entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 (Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Jai Rani, 2006 LLR 1137 (Del HC)). The same ruling has been upheld by the Supreme Court in similar cases.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
24Your mother is unfortunately not eligible for the payment of Gratuity. The Delhi High Court has held that a teacher, including a headmistress of a school, not being an 'employee,' will not be entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 (Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Jai Rani, 2006 LLR 1137 (Del HC)). The same ruling has been upheld by the Supreme Court in similar cases.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Your mother is eligible for Gratuity. There is a notification from the Central Government regarding an amendment in the definition of employees under the Act, making it applicable to all kinds of employees employed in any kind of shop and establishment. It was extended to educational institutes in the year 1997 through a notification.
In view of this, ask the school management. If they still refuse to pay, file an application before the Appropriate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
In view of this, ask the school management. If they still refuse to pay, file an application before the Appropriate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Khola,
Actually, it was the case titled as Ahmedabad Private Primary Teachers' Association vs. Administrative Officer and others that led to the amendment on the above subject, decided by our Hon'ble Supreme Court. In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that if the definition of 'employee' was extended to cover all kinds of employees, it could have used language as wide as that in clause (f) of section 2 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. This clause defines 'employee' to mean any person who is employed for wages in any kind of work, manual or otherwise, in or in connection with the work of an establishment. It was held that the non-use of such wide language in the definition of 'employee' under clause (e) of section 2 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, reinforces the conclusion that teachers are clearly not covered in the said definition.
This observation paved the way to revise the definition of the word "employee." Subsequent to that, a bill for amendment was introduced in Lok Sabha and finally passed by both houses, notified in the official Gazette of India in December 2009.
After that, there is no confusion on this issue, and it is now clear that the Payment of Gratuity Act is applicable to teachers as well.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Actually, it was the case titled as Ahmedabad Private Primary Teachers' Association vs. Administrative Officer and others that led to the amendment on the above subject, decided by our Hon'ble Supreme Court. In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that if the definition of 'employee' was extended to cover all kinds of employees, it could have used language as wide as that in clause (f) of section 2 of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. This clause defines 'employee' to mean any person who is employed for wages in any kind of work, manual or otherwise, in or in connection with the work of an establishment. It was held that the non-use of such wide language in the definition of 'employee' under clause (e) of section 2 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, reinforces the conclusion that teachers are clearly not covered in the said definition.
This observation paved the way to revise the definition of the word "employee." Subsequent to that, a bill for amendment was introduced in Lok Sabha and finally passed by both houses, notified in the official Gazette of India in December 2009.
After that, there is no confusion on this issue, and it is now clear that the Payment of Gratuity Act is applicable to teachers as well.
From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.