Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972

81 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

CHARAN SINGHversusBIRLA TEXTILES & ANR.

1988 INSC 25631 August 1988Dismissed

The appellant, a former employee of the respondent firm, resigned in May 1983 and applied for payment of gratuity, which the employer failed to determine. The statutory controlling authority quantified the gratuity at Rs.16,380 and ordered payment of 9% compound interest under Section 8 of the Payment of Gratuity Act,

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.versusTARA CHAND

2019 INSC 84631 July 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Central Bank of India’s Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2001 allowed employees who were over 40 years of age or had 15 years of service to retire voluntarily. Tara Chand, who had 11 years of service and was over 40, opted for voluntary retirement in February 2001, but the Bank denied him a pro‑rata pension. The Single

WORKMEN OF METRO THEATRE LTD., BOMBAYversusMETRO THEATRE LTD., BOMBAY

1981 INSC 13531 July 1981

The workmen of Metro Theatre Ltd. challenged an Industrial Tribunal award that revised wage scales and dearness allowance effective from 1‑1‑1977, arguing that it should have been retrospective to 1‑1‑1974, that dearness allowance ought to be linked to the cost‑of‑living index, and that the tribunal could grant a more

INDIAN BANK AND ANR.versusN. VENKATRAMANI

2007 INSC 87930 August 2007Disposed off

N. Venkataramani, an employee of Indian Bank, voluntarily retired after 14 years, 9 months and 17 days of service. The bank denied his claim for pension on the ground that he had not completed the statutory minimum of 15 years. The Madras High Court set aside the bank’s order and directed the grant of pension, interpre

CH. CUM MAN. DIRECTOR MAHANADI COALFIELD LTD.versusRABINDRANATH CHOUBEY

2013 INSC 73029 October 2013Disposed off

The appellant, Mahanadi Coalfield Ltd., sought to withhold the gratuity of its former Chief General Manager, Rabindranath Choubey, on the ground that a departmental inquiry for alleged misconduct was pending. The employee retired on superannuation and applied for gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, which

BEED DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.

2006 INSC 68229 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Bank, a co‑operative society, had a gratuity scheme offering 26 days' wages per year of service with a ceiling of Rs 2.5 million. Under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (as amended), the statutory rate is 15 days' wages with a ceiling of Rs 3.5 million. After retirement, the employees claimed the benefit of both t

INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS’ FEDERATION OF INDIA (REGD.)versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

2022 INSC 87929 August 2022Dismissed

The Supreme Court examined the constitutional validity of the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2009, which amended the definition of “employee” in the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and inserted Section 13A with retrospective effect from 3 April 1997 to extend gratuity benefits to teachers in private schools. The pe

BCH ELECTRIC LIMITEDversusPRADEEP MEHRA

2020 INSC 37929 April 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Pradeep Mehra, served as Chief Operating Officer of BCH Electric Limited for 12 years and, upon resignation in June 2012, claimed gratuity of Rs.1.83 crore based on the company's gratuity scheme which did not impose a statutory ceiling. The employer paid only Rs.10 lakh, the ceiling prescribed under Sec

CENTRAL BANK OF LNDIAversusM. SETHUMADHAVAN & ORS.

2017 INSC 28929 March 2017Disposed off

The Central Bank of India and other nationalised banks (appellants) challenged the validity of a cut‑off date they fixed for calculating gratuity payable to retired employees (respondents) under their Regulation 46. The respondents argued that the cut‑off date, which limited the benefit of revised pay scales to retiree

PUNJAB AND SIND BANK AND ORS.versusMOHINDER PAL SINGH AND ORS.

2005 INSC 53828 October 2005

Amarjit Singh Sahni, a cashier‑clerk of Punjab and Sind Bank, applied for voluntary retirement under the bank's scheme (effective 1‑31 Dec 2000) but withdrew his application on 22 Dec 2000 before the bank had accepted it. The bank later treated him as relieved from service on 28 Jan 2001 and denied his reinstatement, d

STATE OF H.P. & ORS.versusRAJESH CHANDER SOOD ETC. ETC.

2016 INSC 92628 September 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Himachal Pradesh Government introduced the 1999 Pension Scheme for employees of state-owned corporations, replacing the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 1995. After a high‑level committee found the scheme financially unsustainable, the Government issued a notification on 2 December 2004 repealing the scheme, allo

SPIC PHARMACEUTICALS DIVISIONversusAUTHORITY UNDER SEC. 48(1) OF A.P. AND ANR.

2007 INSC 23228 February 2007Disposed off

The appellants, manufacturers of pharmaceutical products, dismissed several medical representatives and the employees sought relief from the appellate authority under the Andhra Pradesh Shops and Establishments Act, 1988. The employers contended that the Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1976, bein

CHAIRMAN-CUM-MANAGING DIRECTOR, MAHANADI COALFIELDS LIMITEDversusSRI RABINDRANATH CHOUBEY

2020 INSC 40727 May 2020Disposed off

The appellant, Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd., sought to withhold the gratuity of its former employee, Sri Rabindranath Choubey, who had superannuated while a disciplinary inquiry was pending, and to impose dismissal after the inquiry concluded. The respondent argued that gratuity becomes payable on superannuation and that d

E.L.D. PARRY (I) LTDversusG. OMKAR MURTHY AND ORS.

2001 INSC 17927 March 2001Dismissed

The respondents, former employees of E.I.D. Parry (I) Ltd., retired under a voluntary scheme in 1984 and received gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. Because their monthly wages exceeded Rs 1,000, they were not covered by the definition of "employee" in Section 2(e) of the Central Act, and therefore could

SUDHIR CHANDRA SARKARversusTATA IRON & STEEL CO. LTD. AND OTHERS.

1984 INSC 6927 March 1984Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a permanent uncovenanted employee of Tata Iron & Steel Co., rendered 29 years of continuous service and resigned, thereby becoming eligible for retiring gratuity under the 1937 Retiring Gratuity Rules. The company refused payment, invoking Rule 10 which purported to give it absolute discretion to pay or

NATIONAL INSURANCE SPECIAL VOLUNTARY RETIRED/ RETIRED EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ANR.versusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.

2018 INSC 100126 October 2018Leave Granted & Dismissed

The appellants, former employees of United India Insurance, retired under the General Insurance Employees’ Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2004 (SVRS‑2004) and claimed that they were also entitled to the notional five‑year service benefit provided under the earlier General Insurance (Employees) Pension Scheme, 199

JAGDISH PRASAD SAINI & ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS.

2022 INSC 102326 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, teachers appointed in a grant‑in‑aid school in Rajasthan, were regularised by the Supreme Court but were denied leave‑encashment and gratuity benefits. The High Court held that payment of salary arrears sufficed, ignoring the entitlement to leave encashment and gratuity. On appeal, the Court examined wh

BAKSHI SECURITY AND PERSONNEL SERVICES PVT. LTDversusDEVKISHAN COMPUTED PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

2016 INSC 55926 July 2016Appeal(s) allowed

The Gujarat Transport Department floated a tender for manpower services with conditions that the salary paid must not be less than the minimum wage and that bids must be fixed, not open‑ended. Three bidders qualified; the Technical Evaluation Committee fixed a minimum‑wage figure of Rs 3,00,92,346, rendering the bids o

UNION OF INDIA AND ANR.versusMANIK LAL BANERJEE

2006 INSC 46926 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned whether a railway employee who retired on 31 January 1995 was entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 or whether the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 governed his benefit. The Union of India argued that Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act expressly excludes persons holding a post

ASPINWAL AND CO., KULSHEKAR, MANGALOREversusLAITHA PADUGADY AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 42326 July 1995Appeal(s) allowed

A coffee curing establishment, declared a seasonal industry, operated from September to June and was closed June to September. The workmen claimed gratuity at the rate of seven days' wages for two seasons in each calendar year, arguing that the accounting year (January‑December) split their service into two seasons. Th

DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE AND ORS.versusRAJENDRA KUMAR DUBEY

2020 INSC 65625 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a Sub‑Inspector of the Railway Protection Force, Rajendra Kumar Dubey, who was compulsorily retired on 5 December 2007 for gross neglect of duty relating to theft of railway property. Dubey challenged the retirement in a writ petition, and the Bombay High Court set aside the order, reinstating him wi

MANIBEN MAGANBHAI BHARIYAversusDISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER DAHOD & ORS.

2022 INSC 47325 April 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, Anganwadi workers and helpers employed under the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) scheme in Gujarat, sought gratuity benefits under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Gujarat High Court’s Division Bench held that they were not employees and thus ineligible for gratuity, overturning an e

CEAT LTD.versusMURPHY INDIA EMPLOYEES UNION

2006 INSC 25025 April 2006Dismissed

The case arose from the merger of Murphy India Ltd. with CEAT Ltd., after which 45 workmen were appointed on a temporary basis on 1‑Feb‑1991 and placed on probation. A Memorandum of Settlement dated 29‑Apr‑1991 provided benefits to "permanent workmen" on the rolls as of 31‑Dec‑1990. The workmen claimed that, upon succe

M.C. CHAMARAJUversusHIND NIPPON RURAL INDUSTRIAL (P) LTD.

2007 INSC 86324 August 2007Appeal(s) allowed

M.C. Chamaraju, a supervisor employed by Hind Nippon Rural Industrial (P) Ltd, worked for more than five years across several units before his salary stopped in March 1993. He applied for gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority held that the various units

T.I. CYCLES OF INDIA, AMBATTURversusM.K. GURUMANI AND ORS.

2001 INSC 39224 August 2001Appeal(s) allowed

Workmen who retired from T.I. Cycles of India claimed that incentive wages paid for extra work should be treated as "wages" under Section 2(s) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and thus be included in the calculation of gratuity under Section 4(2). The Controlling Authority and the Madras High Court held the incenti

NATIONAL TEXTILE CORPORATION (M.P.) LTD.versusM.R. JHADAV

2008 INSC 51724 April 2008Case Allowed

The National Textile Corporation (M.P.) Ltd. issued a Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) effective 31 July 2000. M.R. Jadhav applied for the scheme on 16 May 2000 and obtained administrative clearance, but the corporation never communicated a final decision or acceptance, citing lack of funds. Jadhav continued in servic

EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITEDversusANADINATH BANERJEE (D) AND OTHERS

2021 INSC 35123 July 2021Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned whether Anadi Nath Banerjee, whose land was acquired for the Sonepur Bazari Open Cast Project, was entitled to employment under a tripartite agreement that promised jobs to land‑losers possessing at least two acres. The Land Acquisition Collector’s certificate recorded Banerjee’s own holding as 0.300

SHRI DIGVIJAY WOOLLEN MILLS LTD. ETC.versusMAHENDRA PRATAPRAI BUCH ETC.

1980 INSC 13223 July 1980

The Supreme Court considered two appeals by employers challenging the calculation of gratuity under Section 4(2) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The employers had computed the fifteen days' wages component as half of the employee's monthly salary, assuming a 30‑day month, while the employees argued that monthly w

NETRAM SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ANR.

2018 INSC 25823 March 2018Appeal(s) allowed

Netram Sahu was employed by the State of Chhattisgarh as a daily wager from 1 April 1986 and was regularized as a work‑charge employee on 6 May 2008, retiring on 30 July 2011 after a total service of 25 years 3 months. He claimed gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and the Controlling Authority allowed hi

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATAversusM/S. HOOGL Y MILLS CO. LTD.

2006 INSC 87722 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Hooghly Mills Co. Ltd., purchased an industrial undertaking from Fort Gloster Industries Ltd. and, under the sale agreement, assumed the vendor’s accrued and future gratuity liability of about Rs 3.5 crore. The assessee claimed depreciation on this amount under Section 32 of the Income Tax Act, arguing

P. RAJAN SANDHIversusUNION OF INDIA

2010 INSC 62821 September 2010Dismissed

The appellant, an Assistant Editor of a newspaper publishing company, was dismissed after a disciplinary inquiry that found him guilty of misconduct. He subsequently claimed gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, but the employer denied it, invoking the Working Journalists and Other Newspaper Employees (Cond

SUDHIR KUMAR CONSULversusALLAHABAD BANK

2011 INSC 14421 February 2011Dismissed

Sudhir Kumar Consul was appointed as a clerk in Allahabad Bank in 1976 and promoted to officer in 1983. After taking voluntary retirement in 2001, he sought pension under the Old Pension Scheme, invoking Regulation 46(1) of the Allahabad Bank Officers Service Regulations, 1979, which provides pension in lieu of gratuit

DHANSAI SAHUversusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH & ORS.

2020 INSC 7421 January 2020Matter referred to larger bench

DhanSai Sahu, who had worked as a daily‑wager before being regularised as a government employee, claimed gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 after superannuation. The High Court held that Section 2(e) of the Act excluded him because his post was governed by the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules,

SECRETARY, O.N.G.C. LTD. AND ANR.versusV.U. WARRIER

2005 INSC 21720 April 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned V.U. Warrier, a former "gold‑collar" officer of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC), who after retirement failed to vacate a residential quarter allotted to him and was charged penal rent. ONGC deducted Rs.53,632 of the penal rent from the gratuity payable to Warrier under the ONGC (Death, Reti

VIRINDER PAL SINGHversusPUNJAB AND SIND BANK & ORS.

2026 INSC 26619 March 2026Dismissed

The appellant, a bank officer, was served a charge sheet for loan disbursement irregularities on the day he superannuated, and disciplinary proceedings continued, resulting in a permanent reduction of three pay‑scale stages. The appellant challenged the punishment, arguing that post‑retirement only the Pension Regulati

M/S SUNEJA TOWERS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.versusANITA MERCHANT

2023 INSC 39118 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Anita Merchant booked three flats from Suneja Towers Private Limited, paid 60% of the price, but the builder failed to deliver possession even after the agreed period, leading her to file consumer complaints. The District Forum dismissed the complaints, but the State Consumer Commission reversed the decision, ordering

BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.versusO.P. SWARANAKAR ETC.

2002 INSC 54717 December 2002Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined the validity of Voluntary Retirement Schemes (VRS) introduced by State Bank of India and other nationalised banks, focusing on whether an employee’s application for retirement could be withdrawn before the bank’s acceptance despite a clause stating the request was irrevocable. The Court held

D.S. NAKARA & OTHERSversusUNION OF INDIA

1982 INSC 10317 December 1982Case Allowed

The petitioners, two retired government servants and a society of pensioners, challenged two 1979 Government memoranda that liberalised pension computation but limited the benefit to employees who were in service on 31 March 1979 (civil servants) or 1 April 1979 (armed forces) and retired on or after those dates. They

STATE OF PUNJABversusLABOUR COURT, JULLUNDUR & ORS

1979 INSC 21016 October 1979Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Hydel Upper Bari Doab Construction Project, undertaken by the Punjab Hydel Department, qualified as an "establishment" under Section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and whether the retrenchment of its workers entitled them to gratuity. It held that the project fell w

M/S. CREATIVE GARMENTS LTDversusKASHIRAM VERMA

2023 INSC 24316 March 2023Appeal(s) allowed

The employer, M/s. Creative Garments Ltd., appealed against a Labour Court award that reinstated employee Kashiram Verma with back wages. The employee never reported for duty despite multiple communications, and his permanent address was never furnished; only a "care of Union" address was provided. The Supreme Court fo

WESTERN COAL FIELDS LTD.versusMANOHAR GOVINDA FULZELE & ANR.

2025 INSC 23316 February 2025

The Supreme Court examined two appeals challenging the forfeiture of gratuity by a public sector undertaking (Western Coal Fields Ltd.) and the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) after employees were terminated for misconduct. The employees argued that forfeiture required a criminal conviction, which

ALLAHABAD BANK & ANR.versusALL INDIA ALLAHABAD BANK RETIRED EMPS. ASSN.

2009 INSC 130315 December 2009Disposed off

The All India Allahabad Bank Retired Employees Association filed writ petitions seeking gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, alleging that the bank’s pension scheme, which employees had opted for, could not deprive them of statutory gratuity. The Allahabad High Court held that the retirees were entitled to

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERSversusDHIRENDRA PAL SINGH

2016 INSC 102915 November 2016Disposed off

Dhirendra Pal Singh, a retired Assistant Store Superintendent of Uttar Pradesh, had 30% of his gratuity and pension withheld on the ground of alleged stock discrepancies. No departmental enquiry under Article 351‑A of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Service Regulations was ever initiated, and the document relied upon was dated

ASSOCIATE BANKS OFFICERS ASSOCIATIONversusSTATE BANK OF INDIA AND ORS.

1997 INSC 69215 October 1997Dismissed

The Associate Banks Officers Association, representing officers of the State Bank of India’s subsidiary banks, filed a writ petition seeking parity in terminal benefits, medical benefits and extra increments with employees of the State Bank of India (SBI). SBI contended that, under Section 50(2) of the State Bank of In

THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT & ORS. ETC.versusK. CHANDRAN ETC.

2022 INSC 31015 March 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether a government employee convicted of corruption, with a criminal appeal pending, is entitled to his death‑cum‑retirement gratuity (DCRG) under the Kerala Service Rules. The Court held that Rule 3A cannot be read in isolation; it must be read together with Rule 3, Note 2 and Ruling 3, wh

Y.K. SINGLAversusPUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS.

2012 INSC 61914 December 2012Disposed off

Y.K. Singla, a former chief manager of Punjab National Bank, retired on superannuation in 1996 but his gratuity and other retiral benefits were withheld pending criminal proceedings alleging conspiracy. He was acquitted in 2009 and subsequently received his gratuity and leave encashment, but the bank paid interest only

UNION BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERSversusC.G. AJAY BABU AND ANOTHER

2018 INSC 70814 August 2018Dismissed

The Union Bank of India dismissed a branch manager, C.G. Ajay Babu, for alleged misconduct and subsequently forfeited his gratuity on the ground that the misconduct involved moral turpitude. The employee challenged the forfeiture, arguing that under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 forfeiture is not automatic on dismi

KRISHNA GOPAL TIWARY & ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2021 INSC 40113 August 2021Dismissed

The appellants, employees of Coal India Ltd., received gratuity under a 2008 Government office memorandum that raised the ceiling to Rs 10 lakhs effective from 1 January 2007. They challenged the tax deducted at source, arguing that the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2010, which officially raised the ceiling to R

AHMEDABAD PVT. PRIMARY TEACHERS' ASSOCIATIONversusADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND ORS.

2004 INSC 3213 January 2004Dismissed

A teacher employed by a municipal school sought gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, but the Gujarat High Court held that teachers are not "employees" within the meaning of section 2(e) and dismissed the claim. The Ahmedabad Private Primary Teachers' Association appealed, arguing that the definition of emp

BAKSHISH SINGHversusM/S DARSHAN ENGINEERING WORKS & ORS.

1993 INSC 32511 October 1993Appeal(s) allowed

Bakshish Singh, a fitter, resigned after more than ten years of service and claimed gratuity under Section 4(1)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Controlling Authority awarded him gratuity, but the employer challenged the award, and the High Court struck down Section 4(1)(b) as an unreasonable restriction on

SHIVANAND GAURISHANKAR BASWANTIversusLAXMI VISHNU TEXTILE MILLS & ORS.

2008 INSC 80911 July 2008Dismissed

The appellant, a workman of Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills, challenged a tripartite settlement and the sale of the mill’s assets to a purchaser, alleging that the settlement was illegal, that the sale violated a BIFR order under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA), and that the workers’ dues

N. MANOHARAN, ETC.versusTHE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER AND ANOTHER

2026 INSC 14311 February 2026Dismissed

The case concerned whether the retired employees of the Heavy Water Plant (HWP) of the Department of Atomic Energy, Tuticorin, are covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The employees had received gratuity under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and sought the higher amount prescribed under the Gratuity Act, leading

CALCUTTA DOCK LABOUR BOARD AND ANR.versusSMT. SANDHYA MITRA AND ORS.

1985 INSC 2111 February 1985Appeal(s) allowed

Md. Safiur Rehman, a dock worker, died leaving a widow and son. The Calcutta Dock Labour Board sought attachment of the gratuity payable to Rehman under its scheme to satisfy a decree against the heirs. The Small Causes Court ordered attachment, overruling the Board’s objection that gratuity was exempt. The High Court

LALAPPA LINGAPPA & ORS.versusLAXMI VISHNU TEXTILE MILLS LTD., SHOLAPUR

1981 INSC 3011 February 1981Dismissed

The Supreme Court considered claims for gratuity by 85 permanent and 25 badli employees of Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills who sought payment for every year of service irrespective of whether they had worked at least 240 days. The employer had paid gratuity only for years in which the employees were actually employed for 24

JASWANT SINGH GILLversusM/S. BHARAT COKING COAL LTD. AND ORS.

2006 INSC 82110 November 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Jaswant Singh Gill, a chief general manager of Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., faced departmental proceedings for alleged shortage of coal. While the disciplinary inquiry was pending, he retired and applied for gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, which was denied on the ground that his gratuity was forfeited by

KATHEEJA BAIversusTHE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER & ORS.

1984 INSC 10710 May 1984Case Allowed

The petitioner, Katheeja Bai, widow of a retired Tamil Nadu Electricity Board employee, claimed that the Board had failed to credit the special contribution mandated by Regulation 37 of the Board’s Contributory Provident Fund Regulations to her late husband’s provident fund account. The Board contended that this specia

NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ANR.versusKIRPAL SINGH

2014 INSC 2210 January 2014Dismissed

The respondents, employees of National Insurance Co., opted for voluntary retirement under the General Insurance Employees Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2004 (SVRS 2004) and claimed pension under the General Insurance (Employees) Pension Scheme, 1995. The insurers rejected the claim, arguing that pension under t

ASHOK KUMAR DABAS (DEAD THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS)versusDELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION

2025 INSC 14049 December 2025Case Partly allowed

Ashok Kumar Dabas, a conductor with Delhi Transport Corporation since 1985, resigned on 7 August 2014 and his resignation was accepted on 19 September 2014; a subsequent request to withdraw the resignation was denied. The deceased sought pension, gratuity and leave encashment for his legal heirs, but the Tribunal and t

G.S. DHARA SINGHversusE.K. THOMAS & ORS.

1988 INSC 2109 August 1988Dismissed

The case concerned 85 workers who had resigned from the Cochin Port Thozhilali Union and sought a refund of amounts that the union, through its president‑treasurer G.S. Dhara Singh, had collected from the employer on their behalf for gratuity and accident benefit funds. The workers filed civil suits demanding an accoun

BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2019 INSC 14139 January 2019

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of Birla Institute of Technology against the State of Jharkhand on 7 January 2019, relying on the decision in Ahmedabad Pvt. Primary Teachers Association v. Administrative Officer. During the hearing it emerged that Parliament had subsequently amended the definition of “employee” un

SHREE SAJJAN MILLS LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, M.P, BHOPAL AND ANR,

1985 INSC 2248 October 1985Dismissed

Sajjian Mills Ltd, a public limited company, incurred a statutory liability to pay gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and actuarially determined its total liability of Rs 48,59,431 for the assessment year 1973‑74. It made a provision of Rs 20 lakhs in its books, added it back in its return, and claimed a

RAJASTHAN WELFARE SOCIETYversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN

2005 INSC 1927 April 2005Dismissed

The Rajasthan Welfare Society, an aided non‑government educational institution, challenged the State of Rajasthan's refusal to allow the gratuity payable to its employees to be counted as part of the approved expenditure for computing grant‑in‑aid under the Rajasthan Non‑Government Educational Institution Act, 1989. Th

BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2019 INSC 187 March 2019Dismissed

The Birla Institute of Technology (BIT) appealed against the State of Jharkhand and other respondents after a teacher who retired in 2001 claimed gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The High Court had upheld the gratuity award, and BIT challenged the applicability of the Act to teachers, arguing that the

BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYversusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.

2019 INSC 187 January 2019Appeal(s) allowed

The Birla Institute of Technology (BIT) employed Respondent No.4 as an Assistant Professor from 1971 until his superannuation in 2001. He claimed gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, which BIT denied. The controlling authority allowed the claim, but the appellate authority and the High Court upheld BIT's r

MANOJBHAI N. SHAH & ORS.versusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.

2015 INSC 137 January 2015Disposed off

The case concerned employees of five nationalised general insurance companies who had taken voluntary retirement under the 2004 Special Voluntary Retirement Scheme and later sought the benefit of a retrospective pay revision dated 21 December 2005. The employers argued that the scheme was designed to reduce future sala

JYOTIRMAY RAYversusTHE FIELD GENERAL MANAGER, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK & ORS.

2023 INSC 9796 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed

Jyotirmay Ray, a senior manager of Punjab National Bank, was compulsorily retired and denied employer's contribution to his provident fund, gratuity, leave encashment and pension. He challenged the denial of PF contribution and gratuity before the High Court, which partially granted relief, but the Division Bench of th

BALBIR KAUR AND ANR.versusSTEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. AND ORS.

2000 INSC 2925 May 2000Appeal(s) allowed

The petitioners, dependents of a deceased SAIL employee, applied for a compassionate appointment after the employee's death, but SAIL declined, citing a Family Benefit Scheme introduced under the 1989 NJSC Tripartite Agreement that required the family to deposit provident fund and gratuity amounts in exchange for a mon

H.GANGAHANUME GOWDAversusKARNATAKA AGRO INDUSTRIES CORPN. LTD.

2003 INSC 625 February 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a retired employee of Karnataka Agro Industries Corp., had been suspended in 1999, the suspension was later withdrawn, and he retired in 2000 without any order regularising his service or settling salary and allowances. He filed a writ petition seeking full salary for the suspension period, gratuity, cas

NAGAR AYUKT NAGAR NIGAM, KANPURversusSRI MUJIB ULLAH KHAN AND ANOTHER

2019 INSC 4492 April 2019Dismissed

The Municipal Corporation of Kanpur, governed by the Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, sought to limit gratuity payments to its employees to the rates prescribed under the 1962 Retirement Benefits and General Provident Fund Regulations, arguing that the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 did not apply to local bodies

MANAGEMENT OF KSRTC TH. CHIEF LAW OFFICERversusR. KRISHNA REDDY

2006 INSC 7771 November 2006Dismissed

The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (KSRTC) had a settlement with its employees that tied the rate of Dearness Allowance (DA) to the rates sanctioned by the State Government and required any merger of DA with basic pay to be considered for calculating gratuity. The State Government issued a Government Order

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search