Dear Friends
1. Is it true that certain organizations, such as Educational and research Institutes are not covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act?
2. Does the recent amendment to this act apply only to Teachers (or also other staff) in schools and colleges?
3. Is there a specific "Private Law" applicable to such organizations defining the social security and other benefits to be given to its employees?
Thanks & regards
From India, Madras
1. Is it true that certain organizations, such as Educational and research Institutes are not covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act?
2. Does the recent amendment to this act apply only to Teachers (or also other staff) in schools and colleges?
3. Is there a specific "Private Law" applicable to such organizations defining the social security and other benefits to be given to its employees?
Thanks & regards
From India, Madras
Dear Friends
I would appreciate if somone responds mainly to the following question:
Is it true that certain organizations, such as Educational and research Institutes are not covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act?
thanks and regards
From India, Madras
I would appreciate if somone responds mainly to the following question:
Is it true that certain organizations, such as Educational and research Institutes are not covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act?
thanks and regards
From India, Madras
Dear
It is hereby made clear that according to section 1(b) of the P G Act, 1972 every shop or establishment within the meaning of any law for the time being in force in relation to shops & establishments in a State,in which ten or more persons are employed or were employed, on any day of the preceding twelve months will be covered under this Act & every employee per the definition of the employee under section 2(e) are entitled to receive all benefits as are provided under this Act. After going through the definition of the 'employee' teachers are not termed as employee under this Act & hence they are not given gratuity payment under this Act.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
363It is hereby made clear that according to section 1(b) of the P G Act, 1972 every shop or establishment within the meaning of any law for the time being in force in relation to shops & establishments in a State,in which ten or more persons are employed or were employed, on any day of the preceding twelve months will be covered under this Act & every employee per the definition of the employee under section 2(e) are entitled to receive all benefits as are provided under this Act. After going through the definition of the 'employee' teachers are not termed as employee under this Act & hence they are not given gratuity payment under this Act.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
Thank you for the clarification. However:
I just found out that there is an amendment to the payment of Gratuity act that
2. In the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), in section 2, for clause (e), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:—
‘(e) “employee” means any person (other than an apprentice) who is employed for wages, whether the terms of such employment are express or implied, in any kind of work, manual or otherwise, in or in connection with the work of a factory, mine,oilfield, plantation, port, railway company, shop or other establishment to which this Act applies, but does not include any such person who holds a post under the Central Government or a State Government and is governed by any other Act or by any rules
providing for payment of gratuity;'
According to the above (broader) definition of Employee, would teachers and all the staff working in a research institute (researchers, research and technical assistants etc) be definitely covered under the Payment of Gratuity Act?
Thanks
with regards
From India, Madras
I just found out that there is an amendment to the payment of Gratuity act that
2. In the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the principal Act), in section 2, for clause (e), the following clause shall be substituted, namely:—
‘(e) “employee” means any person (other than an apprentice) who is employed for wages, whether the terms of such employment are express or implied, in any kind of work, manual or otherwise, in or in connection with the work of a factory, mine,oilfield, plantation, port, railway company, shop or other establishment to which this Act applies, but does not include any such person who holds a post under the Central Government or a State Government and is governed by any other Act or by any rules
providing for payment of gratuity;'
According to the above (broader) definition of Employee, would teachers and all the staff working in a research institute (researchers, research and technical assistants etc) be definitely covered under the Payment of Gratuity Act?
Thanks
with regards
From India, Madras
Dear
It is again clarified that teacher is not considered as employee under this Act by different Courts. Amendment is under consideration to include teacher in the definition of the employee. Other staff as mentioned by you are considered as employee & are entitled to have gratuity benefit under this Act if the establishment is covered under this Act.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
It is again clarified that teacher is not considered as employee under this Act by different Courts. Amendment is under consideration to include teacher in the definition of the employee. Other staff as mentioned by you are considered as employee & are entitled to have gratuity benefit under this Act if the establishment is covered under this Act.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
Dear Sir
I am very thankful for the clarification. One more doubt:
Ours is a Research Institute established under Article 24 of the Treaty of Cession of French Territories in India that states that "it shall be maintained as a research and advanced educational establishment"
Although our Institute is more than 50 years old, the provision for paying Gratuity when people retired was started only after 1994 (but is lesser than the prescribed law in the sense that it is 15/30 times years of service instead of 15/26 and till Januar 2010, the upper limit remained 2.5 lakhs instead of 3.5 lakhs)
Hence, we are not sure if the management is bound by the law on Payment of Gratuity or is just doing it out of "goodwill" and hence, arbitarily
with thanks and best regards
From India, Madras
I am very thankful for the clarification. One more doubt:
Ours is a Research Institute established under Article 24 of the Treaty of Cession of French Territories in India that states that "it shall be maintained as a research and advanced educational establishment"
Although our Institute is more than 50 years old, the provision for paying Gratuity when people retired was started only after 1994 (but is lesser than the prescribed law in the sense that it is 15/30 times years of service instead of 15/26 and till Januar 2010, the upper limit remained 2.5 lakhs instead of 3.5 lakhs)
Hence, we are not sure if the management is bound by the law on Payment of Gratuity or is just doing it out of "goodwill" and hence, arbitarily
with thanks and best regards
From India, Madras
Dear
In this situation contact your area enforcement officer/ law enforcing agency ( labour department) of the appropriate govt. Ask him to hear both the parties for settlement of your grievance/dispute.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
In this situation contact your area enforcement officer/ law enforcing agency ( labour department) of the appropriate govt. Ask him to hear both the parties for settlement of your grievance/dispute.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
Sir ,
I've resigned from M/S, Sarabhai Zydus Animal Heath ltd. on 1st October'1999, from Andhra Pradesh. My gratuity was not settled by the employer till today. In this connection,i've filed a case in labour court in the year 2001, but it was rejected by labour dept. due to delay incondonence, further, I've lodged a greivance in Department of Administrative reforms & public grievance(DARPG) at New delhi vide Greivance No. DARPG/E/2006/06717 dated 21st July'2006 to settle my gratuity(since my resignation in the year 1999) from M/S, Sarabhai Zydus Animal Heath ltd. Vadodara. The above department has control over 16 departments under central & state governments including Department of Labour. Inspite of several reminders there is no action either from DARPG or the employer and also the dept. of labour, Gujarath.It is embarrassing to an employee whose common rights have not been protected by such departments. Kindly provide me information to solve the above problem.
From India, Nellore
I've resigned from M/S, Sarabhai Zydus Animal Heath ltd. on 1st October'1999, from Andhra Pradesh. My gratuity was not settled by the employer till today. In this connection,i've filed a case in labour court in the year 2001, but it was rejected by labour dept. due to delay incondonence, further, I've lodged a greivance in Department of Administrative reforms & public grievance(DARPG) at New delhi vide Greivance No. DARPG/E/2006/06717 dated 21st July'2006 to settle my gratuity(since my resignation in the year 1999) from M/S, Sarabhai Zydus Animal Heath ltd. Vadodara. The above department has control over 16 departments under central & state governments including Department of Labour. Inspite of several reminders there is no action either from DARPG or the employer and also the dept. of labour, Gujarath.It is embarrassing to an employee whose common rights have not been protected by such departments. Kindly provide me information to solve the above problem.
From India, Nellore
Dear
As per your brief statement you have already filed a claim case before the Labour Court/ Controlling Authority under the PG Act, 1972 which was rejected on the ground of delay in filing the claim case. At that time inspite of approaching DARPG of you should have preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority within 60 days from the date of receipt of order. Therefore, now in my opinion no remedy is available with you. You have already availed the legal remedy available with you.
Opinion/ comments submitted as requested.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
As per your brief statement you have already filed a claim case before the Labour Court/ Controlling Authority under the PG Act, 1972 which was rejected on the ground of delay in filing the claim case. At that time inspite of approaching DARPG of you should have preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority within 60 days from the date of receipt of order. Therefore, now in my opinion no remedy is available with you. You have already availed the legal remedy available with you.
Opinion/ comments submitted as requested.
With Regards,
R.N.Khola
From India, Delhi
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.
Gratuity Act-Teachers-Ma dhya Pradesh.docx
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 & The Rules.ppt