Is 4 years 11 months 11 days of continuous service in a Limited company applicable to claim Gratuity? I have served 21 days short for 6 years complete, including 11 months of probation. However, the company is still denying to provide my gratuity.
Acknowledge(0)
Amend(0)
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
As per statutory requirements regarding eligibility for gratuity payment, if an employee completes 4 years of continuous service and in the 5th year, if he completes 240 working days (including weekly offs, paid leave, National/Festival holidays of the company), he is entitled to receive payment of gratuity.
Thank you.
From India, Aizawl
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
699Thank you.
From India, Aizawl
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Gailygobi420,
I disagree with both the learned friends who responded that you are eligible for gratuity for working 4 years 11 months 11 days. As per the Gratuity Act, gratuity is payable to an employee upon the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not less than five years. If you are from Chennai or Kerala, then you are eligible for gratuity in light of the Madras High Court judgment in Mettur Beardsell Ltd vs Regional Labour Commissioner (1998 LLR 1072) and the Kerala High Court in Sreeja Vs Regional Joint Labour Commissioner (2015 LLR 826).
You further mentioned that you served 21 days short for 6 years, including 11 months of probation. Then where is the question? You are eligible then. Or did you make a mistake in writing 21 days short for 6 years?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I disagree with both the learned friends who responded that you are eligible for gratuity for working 4 years 11 months 11 days. As per the Gratuity Act, gratuity is payable to an employee upon the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not less than five years. If you are from Chennai or Kerala, then you are eligible for gratuity in light of the Madras High Court judgment in Mettur Beardsell Ltd vs Regional Labour Commissioner (1998 LLR 1072) and the Kerala High Court in Sreeja Vs Regional Joint Labour Commissioner (2015 LLR 826).
You further mentioned that you served 21 days short for 6 years, including 11 months of probation. Then where is the question? You are eligible then. Or did you make a mistake in writing 21 days short for 6 years?
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear friends,
The continuous service of 4 years and 240 days for the 5th year norm has been upheld by the Apex court in a couple of judgments in determining 'continuous service', therefore it will be in order to grant gratuity in this respect. Based on the Supreme Court's judgment, this norm applies commonly all over India.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
The continuous service of 4 years and 240 days for the 5th year norm has been upheld by the Apex court in a couple of judgments in determining 'continuous service', therefore it will be in order to grant gratuity in this respect. Based on the Supreme Court's judgment, this norm applies commonly all over India.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Prof. Kumar S.
With due respect to you, I would like you to elaborate on the couple of judgments in determining 'continuous service' so that there will be clarity in understanding by the members like me and there won't be any ambiguity.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
With due respect to you, I would like you to elaborate on the couple of judgments in determining 'continuous service' so that there will be clarity in understanding by the members like me and there won't be any ambiguity.
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear colleagues,
There have been lengthy discussions on this issue a few years ago in this forum. Many still argue that a person becomes eligible only when he/she completes 5 years of 'continuous service'. In saying so, most keep in mind 5 x 12 calendar months, quoting verbatim words mentioned in the act. However, conveniently forgetting/ignoring that a year of service also means a minimum of 240 days of 'employment' in the preceding year. For the purpose of gratuity, service over 6 months can be treated as a full year. Action has not been initiated even after the interpretation made in the apex court's judgments more than once to amend the act to remove the ambiguity and bring in uniformity all over.
Please go through the following link on the subject: https://www.citehr.com/440537-gratui...ml#post1993632
Also, the Supreme Court judgment is attached.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
There have been lengthy discussions on this issue a few years ago in this forum. Many still argue that a person becomes eligible only when he/she completes 5 years of 'continuous service'. In saying so, most keep in mind 5 x 12 calendar months, quoting verbatim words mentioned in the act. However, conveniently forgetting/ignoring that a year of service also means a minimum of 240 days of 'employment' in the preceding year. For the purpose of gratuity, service over 6 months can be treated as a full year. Action has not been initiated even after the interpretation made in the apex court's judgments more than once to amend the act to remove the ambiguity and bring in uniformity all over.
Please go through the following link on the subject: https://www.citehr.com/440537-gratui...ml#post1993632
Also, the Supreme Court judgment is attached.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear Prof. Kumar S.,
Thanks for responding. I am not an expert, but I would like to present some logic as follows:
The Supreme Court judgment in Lallappa Lingappa is from 1981. The Madras High Court judgment in Mettur Beardsell Ltd is from 1998. Additionally, the Kerala High Court judgment in Sreeja is from 2015.
If the Supreme Court decided on the subject in 1981, how did the High Courts in Madras and Kerala admit the matter subsequent to the SC decision? Furthermore, how does the ambiguity persist thereafter?
I hope this clarifies the issue at hand.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Thanks for responding. I am not an expert, but I would like to present some logic as follows:
The Supreme Court judgment in Lallappa Lingappa is from 1981. The Madras High Court judgment in Mettur Beardsell Ltd is from 1998. Additionally, the Kerala High Court judgment in Sreeja is from 2015.
If the Supreme Court decided on the subject in 1981, how did the High Courts in Madras and Kerala admit the matter subsequent to the SC decision? Furthermore, how does the ambiguity persist thereafter?
I hope this clarifies the issue at hand.
Best regards,
[Your Name]
From India, Mumbai
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
Dear colleagues,
I only shared what is available through the web, law journals, reports, articles, and other sources. I'm not a legal practitioner/expert either, as I'm still in service, but a keen reader of legal/HR/Fin. matters, truly an academician in real terms. I believe there is a lot more, oceans of knowledge and info to be known and read; there cannot be limits. In this sense, it's not right to interpret the judgments passed by the courts, but only can analyze for sharing knowledge's sake. We can disseminate whatever we think is right. The chronology you pointed out is correct, but we can't say why and why not. Things do happen, but the legal system is such that unless there are pleas, courts will not be able to analyze all the cases dealt with in all the courts en masse, as you know. Interpretation of laws does differ from court to court, even judge to judge. For people willing to take advantage of available info/aids, it's proactive. The unwilling persons take advantage of the fact that the Act still remains unamended. I would appeal to all concerned to take a positive view on the matter and pave the way to grant gratuity rightfully due.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
I only shared what is available through the web, law journals, reports, articles, and other sources. I'm not a legal practitioner/expert either, as I'm still in service, but a keen reader of legal/HR/Fin. matters, truly an academician in real terms. I believe there is a lot more, oceans of knowledge and info to be known and read; there cannot be limits. In this sense, it's not right to interpret the judgments passed by the courts, but only can analyze for sharing knowledge's sake. We can disseminate whatever we think is right. The chronology you pointed out is correct, but we can't say why and why not. Things do happen, but the legal system is such that unless there are pleas, courts will not be able to analyze all the cases dealt with in all the courts en masse, as you know. Interpretation of laws does differ from court to court, even judge to judge. For people willing to take advantage of available info/aids, it's proactive. The unwilling persons take advantage of the fact that the Act still remains unamended. I would appeal to all concerned to take a positive view on the matter and pave the way to grant gratuity rightfully due.
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
You will find more information and insight into the subject in these links:
- [SC Judgement Gratuity PDF Download](https://www.citehr.com/108564-sc-judgement-gratuity-pdf-download.html)
- [Indian Kanoon](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1541846/)
- [Tax Management India](https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/View_discussions_detail.asp?ID=115324)
- [Labour Service Legal Advice - Gratuity Issue](https://lawrato.com/labour-service-legal-advice/served-4-years-240-days-company-is-not-giving-gratuity-7377)
- [Lawyers Club India Forum Discussion on Gratuity Eligibility](https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/gratuity-eligibility-4-yrs-8-months-110913.asp)
- [LinkedIn Article on Gratuity Eligibility](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/gratuity-eligibility-4-yrs-8-months-qamer-siddiqui)
From India, Bangalore
Acknowledge(0)Amend(0)
- [SC Judgement Gratuity PDF Download](https://www.citehr.com/108564-sc-judgement-gratuity-pdf-download.html)
- [Indian Kanoon](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1541846/)
- [Tax Management India](https://www.taxmanagementindia.com/web/View_discussions_detail.asp?ID=115324)
- [Labour Service Legal Advice - Gratuity Issue](https://lawrato.com/labour-service-legal-advice/served-4-years-240-days-company-is-not-giving-gratuity-7377)
- [Lawyers Club India Forum Discussion on Gratuity Eligibility](https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/gratuity-eligibility-4-yrs-8-months-110913.asp)
- [LinkedIn Article on Gratuity Eligibility](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/gratuity-eligibility-4-yrs-8-months-qamer-siddiqui)
From India, Bangalore
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.
Telangana Shops Permitted To Remain Open 365 Days A Year Extended To Three Years.PDF