No Tags Found!


Dear Harpreet,

We respect your suggestion, but please note that any court judgment in a particular case is applicable to that case only. The Gratuity Act still states that eligibility to receive gratuity is after five years; where has the 240 days requirement come from? We seem to be mixing in other sections to analyze the situation in our favor. If the Madras High Court has issued a judgment in one case, it cannot be considered a law.


From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Dear Keshav Jee,

I too agree that eligibility to get the gratuity is 5 years of service, and on the basis of one judgment, it cannot become a law. Even in Tamil Nadu, it is 5 years of service to get gratuity. In one case, Madras High Court has given judgment on various interpretations, but there is no amendment in the Gratuity Act where it is clearly mentioned 5 years of service is required to become eligible for gratuity.

JS Malik


From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

If you completed 5 years of service then you are eligible for gratuity(except in the case of Death).
From India
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Dear friend,

Tomorrow will be your last working day. If you send an email directly to me, I will provide you with the total account details. I am unsure how to add a Word document in which the information is available. Please forward it to Sekar at the email ID chith1954@gmail.com.

Thank you.

From India, Chennai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

The gratuity eligibility service as per Gratuity Act 1972 is 5 years.But as per the judgment from Supreme Court below and the quotation from the book quoted below it seems that the gratuity eligibility service is 4 years 240 days.
"Judgment from Supreme Court:

"Yes, by virtue of the judgment of Supreme Court rendered under the provisions of the Industrial Dispute Act in Surendra Kumar Verma vs. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal,[(1980) (4) S.C.C.433)], it is enough that an employee has a service of 240 days in the preceding 12 months and it is not necessary that he should have completed one whole year’s service. As the definition of continuous service in Industrial Dispute Act and Payment of Gratuity Act are synonymous, the same principal can be adopted under the act also and hence an employee rendering service of 4 year 10months 11days is considered to have completed 5 years continuous service under sec.4(2) and thereby is eligible for gratuity."

From India, Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Dear Hrnitinji,

You are requested to read carefully the Judgment of the Supreme Court and talk about. I have read the said Judgment carefully, and in one of my posts earlier, I have given my views on it. You may do research on it. In fact, I had decided not to participate in this discussion, but your post compelled me to write this.

From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Dear All,

We agree that the definition in the act still says 5 years; however, there are many cases wherein different courts have given judgments in favor of 4 years and 240 days. I believe the judges have some sense in the interpretation of this act and find it sensible enough to understand the unspoken meaning of 5 years of service.

Also, has anyone thought of putting forward a suggestion in the forum? It may not be the right area; however, if it is taken into the right area where the acts/laws can be considered for modification. Also, a question to those who call themselves "experts," have they ever thought about why there are prevailing laws/acts? Are these for people, or are people meant for them? In my opinion, supporting that cases considering 4 years and 240 days can be adopted to modify the act if put forward in the right forum. Until then, even if I have to raise my voice to anyone to get things in my favor to claim the gratuity amount, I will seek support from the judgments given. I hope this will be done by others as well in all states, and then there will not be any question of validity in specific areas only. We are not advocates here, and the forum is not for advocates who run the show based solely on black and white. We are human resource personnel who have to consider what is right and wrong and whether we can modify/alter things by giving or proposing in the right direction.

Thanks.

From India, New Delhi
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)

Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.






Contact Us Privacy Policy Disclaimer Terms Of Service

All rights reserved @ 2025 CiteHR ®

All Copyright And Trademarks in Posts Held By Respective Owners.