I joined a PSU on 2nd September 2013 and am now shifting to a private organization. My last working day in the PSU is 15th June 2018. The total working period in the PSU is 4 years, 9 months, and 13 days. Am I eligible for Gratuity? My illiterate HR personnel are saying that 5 years are required. Kindly help; it's urgent.
From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
1From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vivekcorporate1990,
On this forum, most of the literate HR people will give an answer in your favor. However, your less literate HR colleagues are also correct. In your case, 5 years of completed service is required unless you fall under the jurisdiction of Madras HC or Kerala HC.
I apologize for responding in your language.
.................................................. .................................................. ........................................
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
On this forum, most of the literate HR people will give an answer in your favor. However, your less literate HR colleagues are also correct. In your case, 5 years of completed service is required unless you fall under the jurisdiction of Madras HC or Kerala HC.
I apologize for responding in your language.
.................................................. .................................................. ........................................
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Professional courtesy demands that wordings like "illiterate HR" be eschewed in a forum like this dedicated to improving HR knowledge and practices. The law states that 5 years of continuous service with 240 days worked in the last year of service are required for gratuity eligibility.
Many individuals are relying on a single Madras court judgment to assume that even if you have less than 5 years of service, you automatically qualify for gratuity. However, in my opinion, you are not entitled to gratuity.
Kindly note that it is essential to adhere to the legal requirements and not base assumptions on singular court rulings.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Many individuals are relying on a single Madras court judgment to assume that even if you have less than 5 years of service, you automatically qualify for gratuity. However, in my opinion, you are not entitled to gratuity.
Kindly note that it is essential to adhere to the legal requirements and not base assumptions on singular court rulings.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Mr. Keshav,
Whoever, despite knowing the rules or being ignorant, harasses an employee is deemed to be called illiterate. Kindly buy a dictionary to understand the meaning of illustrate.
Secondly, kindly do not share misinformation on threads if you do not have complete information and misguide. There is a Supreme Court judgment in this regard. So, don't restrict it to the Madras High Court.
I hope you understand it in your language.
From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Whoever, despite knowing the rules or being ignorant, harasses an employee is deemed to be called illiterate. Kindly buy a dictionary to understand the meaning of illustrate.
Secondly, kindly do not share misinformation on threads if you do not have complete information and misguide. There is a Supreme Court judgment in this regard. So, don't restrict it to the Madras High Court.
I hope you understand it in your language.
From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Respected Vivekcorporate1990,
When our learned member Nathrao expressly said that professional courtesy demands that wordings like "Illiterate HR" be eschewed in a forum like this dedicated to improving HR knowledge and practices, I need not go for buying a dictionary to understand the meaning of the word you express or expressed.
With due respect to you, Sir, I would advise you to kindly read and interpret the Supreme Court Judgment. You can even read my comments on the said judgment of the Supreme Court in my various posts. I do not wish to repeat it here once again.
Now the question is on misleading. Corporates have paid me charges for giving a legal opinion on this issue of Gratuity. I am here on this forum with more than 2400 posts responding to the queries of members honorarily like others just because of sharing knowledge and in turn gaining too from people like you.
I have given 64 lectures up till now on various Labour Laws to various Corporates and HR professionals across the industry, apart from lecturing in College. However, no one told me that I misguided at any time.
I always appreciate that one can have a different view or a different perception of any issue. But it should be supported with appropriate justification.
You are free to stand by your own view/perception and get your due right from the court of law.
Regards,
Keshav Korgaonkar
Advocate High Court Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
When our learned member Nathrao expressly said that professional courtesy demands that wordings like "Illiterate HR" be eschewed in a forum like this dedicated to improving HR knowledge and practices, I need not go for buying a dictionary to understand the meaning of the word you express or expressed.
With due respect to you, Sir, I would advise you to kindly read and interpret the Supreme Court Judgment. You can even read my comments on the said judgment of the Supreme Court in my various posts. I do not wish to repeat it here once again.
Now the question is on misleading. Corporates have paid me charges for giving a legal opinion on this issue of Gratuity. I am here on this forum with more than 2400 posts responding to the queries of members honorarily like others just because of sharing knowledge and in turn gaining too from people like you.
I have given 64 lectures up till now on various Labour Laws to various Corporates and HR professionals across the industry, apart from lecturing in College. However, no one told me that I misguided at any time.
I always appreciate that one can have a different view or a different perception of any issue. But it should be supported with appropriate justification.
You are free to stand by your own view/perception and get your due right from the court of law.
Regards,
Keshav Korgaonkar
Advocate High Court Mumbai
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Sir,
I have gone through multiple forums, and each one has unanimously stated that if a person has served 240 days in the fourth year, he is eligible for gratuity. I haven't found any of your posts on the same.
Also, the word "illiterate" HR was not used for the HR community but for 4-5 HR officials working in my corporation who are actually illiterate and just luckily got promoted from the steno level. Hope that clarifies.
From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I have gone through multiple forums, and each one has unanimously stated that if a person has served 240 days in the fourth year, he is eligible for gratuity. I haven't found any of your posts on the same.
Also, the word "illiterate" HR was not used for the HR community but for 4-5 HR officials working in my corporation who are actually illiterate and just luckily got promoted from the steno level. Hope that clarifies.
From India, Ludhiana
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vivek,
There are conflicting opinions about 240 days of service in the last year. The issue is still different. This being a public and professional forum, your words such as "illiterate HR" and kindly do not "shit" on threads if you do not have complete information and misguide are highly inappropriate. Courtesy demands that such words are not used. I leave it to your good sense now.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There are conflicting opinions about 240 days of service in the last year. The issue is still different. This being a public and professional forum, your words such as "illiterate HR" and kindly do not "shit" on threads if you do not have complete information and misguide are highly inappropriate. Courtesy demands that such words are not used. I leave it to your good sense now.
From India, Pune
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Keshav Jee,
I would be highly obliged if you could share the link to your threads about the Supreme Court judgment interpretation on Gratuity and your comments on the said judgment of the Supreme Court in your various posts. I need it for my academic interest.
Regards,
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I would be highly obliged if you could share the link to your threads about the Supreme Court judgment interpretation on Gratuity and your comments on the said judgment of the Supreme Court in your various posts. I need it for my academic interest.
Regards,
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Azim ji,
With due respect to you as well as other members, I do not wish to discuss more on this topic. There are different views on this topic, and I have expressed my views with appropriate support many times on this forum. I am providing only one link to you below to help you form your stance on the subject matter:
https://www.citehr.com/108564-sc-jud...-download.html
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
With due respect to you as well as other members, I do not wish to discuss more on this topic. There are different views on this topic, and I have expressed my views with appropriate support many times on this forum. I am providing only one link to you below to help you form your stance on the subject matter:
https://www.citehr.com/108564-sc-jud...-download.html
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Vivek,
The learned HR members in this forum have expressed and shared their knowledge of law and interpretation on the eligibility for gratuity. The Apex court judgment may strengthen your case if you fight it out in the court of law. However, since the service eligibility of five years has not been amended in the Gratuity Act, the same will apply, and on that basis, the refusal by your HR to pay you gratuity is not wrong.
You seem to be expressing your anger over the refusal of gratuity by your HR to the members of this respectable forum unnecessarily and have used ungentlemanly language, which you should not have. You should express your apology, and if you don't, stop seeking free advice.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The learned HR members in this forum have expressed and shared their knowledge of law and interpretation on the eligibility for gratuity. The Apex court judgment may strengthen your case if you fight it out in the court of law. However, since the service eligibility of five years has not been amended in the Gratuity Act, the same will apply, and on that basis, the refusal by your HR to pay you gratuity is not wrong.
You seem to be expressing your anger over the refusal of gratuity by your HR to the members of this respectable forum unnecessarily and have used ungentlemanly language, which you should not have. You should express your apology, and if you don't, stop seeking free advice.
Regards,
Vinayak Nagarkar
HR Consultant
From India, Mumbai
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.
Surendra_Kumar_ Verma_Etc_vs_Th e_Central_Gover nment_on_23_Sep tember_1980 Gratuity payable 4 years.pdf
Gratuity Form I.doc