My wife worked 12 years in a pvt school in west bengal. She was absent for 2 days due to injury in leg, for the reason theprincipal terminated her job and did not pay current month pay . Can she claim current month pay, termination compensation and GRATUITY for 12 years of service. She is a P F employee for 11 years.The school was appointing every year on contract basis for one year .Will this be a problem in claim of Gratuity
From India, Kolkata
From India, Kolkata
Dear Mr.Agrawal Please indicate the number of teaching and non teaching staff employed by the school wherein your wife was employed. With regards
From India, Madras
169From India, Madras
Dear Mr.Agrawal The Payment of Gratuity Act is applicable to the school in which your wife was employed and she is entitled to get gratuity at the rates prescribed. With regards
From India, Madras
From India, Madras
Dear Sir, Kindly let me know why you asked the number of teaching and non teaching staff before answering the above mentioned question as i want for my knowledge Regards Vikas
From India, Calcutta
From India, Calcutta
Sir let me know that 4.8 year service employees is eligible for grauity. if yes ?.How. pls reply sir. Regards Sandeep Kumar
From United States, Plymouth
From United States, Plymouth
Dear Mr.Vikas
Please read section 1(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act. According to this section the Payment of Gratuity Act applies to
(a) every factory, mine, oilfield,plantation port or railway company.
According to section 2(g) of the Payment of Gratuity Act,the term "factory" has the meaning assigned to it in clause (m) of section 2 of the Factories Act. Therefore, the relevant school is not a "factory" as defined under the Factories Act..
Similarly under section 2(j) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "mine:" has the meaning assigned to it in clause (j) of sub section 1 of Section 2 of the Mines Act, Therefore the relevant school is not a "mine" as defined under the Mines Act.
Similarly under section 2(l) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "oil field" has the meaning assigned to in clause (e) of section 3 of the Oil Fields (Regulation and Development) Act 1948. Therefore the relevant school is not a "oilfield" as defined under the clause (e) of section 3 of the Oil Fields (Regulation and Development) Act 1948.
Similarly under section 2(m) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "plantation" has the meaning assigned to it clause (f) nof section 2 of the Plantation Labour Act. Therefore the relevant school is not a "plantation" as defined under the Plantation Labour Act.
Similarly under section 2(p) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "railway company" has the meaning assigned to it in clause (5) of the Indian Railways Act. Therefore the relevant school is not a "railway company" as defined under the Indian Railways Act.
Similarly under section 2(n) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "port" has the meaning assigned to it in clause(4) of section 3 of the Indian Ports Act. Therefore the relevant school is not a "port" as defined under the Indian Ports Act.
As the Payment of Gratuity Act cannot be made applicable to a school under section 1(3) (a) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, we have to see whether the P.G. Act can be made applicable under section 1(3) (b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act.
It has been held in a judgment of the Supreme Court of India that the "schools" are "establishments to which any law for the time being in force is applicable" as contained in section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act. Therefore, the other condition to be fulfilled under section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act for the applicability of the PG Act to a school is that it should employ 10 or more persons or 10 or more persons were employed on any day during the preceding twelve calendar months in that school.
Therefore in order ascertain whether the relevant school has employed 10 or more persons, I asked to know the number of persons employed therein.
I trust your doubt is cleared.
With regards
From India, Madras
Please read section 1(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act. According to this section the Payment of Gratuity Act applies to
(a) every factory, mine, oilfield,plantation port or railway company.
According to section 2(g) of the Payment of Gratuity Act,the term "factory" has the meaning assigned to it in clause (m) of section 2 of the Factories Act. Therefore, the relevant school is not a "factory" as defined under the Factories Act..
Similarly under section 2(j) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "mine:" has the meaning assigned to it in clause (j) of sub section 1 of Section 2 of the Mines Act, Therefore the relevant school is not a "mine" as defined under the Mines Act.
Similarly under section 2(l) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "oil field" has the meaning assigned to in clause (e) of section 3 of the Oil Fields (Regulation and Development) Act 1948. Therefore the relevant school is not a "oilfield" as defined under the clause (e) of section 3 of the Oil Fields (Regulation and Development) Act 1948.
Similarly under section 2(m) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "plantation" has the meaning assigned to it clause (f) nof section 2 of the Plantation Labour Act. Therefore the relevant school is not a "plantation" as defined under the Plantation Labour Act.
Similarly under section 2(p) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "railway company" has the meaning assigned to it in clause (5) of the Indian Railways Act. Therefore the relevant school is not a "railway company" as defined under the Indian Railways Act.
Similarly under section 2(n) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the term "port" has the meaning assigned to it in clause(4) of section 3 of the Indian Ports Act. Therefore the relevant school is not a "port" as defined under the Indian Ports Act.
As the Payment of Gratuity Act cannot be made applicable to a school under section 1(3) (a) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, we have to see whether the P.G. Act can be made applicable under section 1(3) (b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act.
It has been held in a judgment of the Supreme Court of India that the "schools" are "establishments to which any law for the time being in force is applicable" as contained in section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act. Therefore, the other condition to be fulfilled under section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act for the applicability of the PG Act to a school is that it should employ 10 or more persons or 10 or more persons were employed on any day during the preceding twelve calendar months in that school.
Therefore in order ascertain whether the relevant school has employed 10 or more persons, I asked to know the number of persons employed therein.
I trust your doubt is cleared.
With regards
From India, Madras
Dear Mr.Sandeep
In a judgment, the Honourable Madras High Court has held that if an "employee" has worked for 240 days in a year in an establishment, he is deemed to have worked for one continuous year. Therefore, in the fifth year if the employee has worked for 240 days he is deemed to have put in one year of continuous service, even though he had not worked for one full year or twelve calendar months. Therefore if an employee has worked for 4 years and 240 days he is deemed to have put in five years of continuous service and is entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act. But this judgment is applicable in Tamilnadu only. I am not aware of any other similar judgments either by the High Courts of other States or by the Supreme Court.
With regards
From India, Madras
In a judgment, the Honourable Madras High Court has held that if an "employee" has worked for 240 days in a year in an establishment, he is deemed to have worked for one continuous year. Therefore, in the fifth year if the employee has worked for 240 days he is deemed to have put in one year of continuous service, even though he had not worked for one full year or twelve calendar months. Therefore if an employee has worked for 4 years and 240 days he is deemed to have put in five years of continuous service and is entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act. But this judgment is applicable in Tamilnadu only. I am not aware of any other similar judgments either by the High Courts of other States or by the Supreme Court.
With regards
From India, Madras
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
Madras HC judg regarding gratuity is applicable if workmen is working 4 years 240 days..pdf