Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.28 seconds)Section 14 in THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 [Entire Act]
Section 5 in THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 [Entire Act]
Municipal Corporation Of Delhi vs Dharam Prakash Sharma And Anr. on 29 July, 1998
On a combined reading of the judgments of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Dharam Prakash Sharma & ors, and
Union of India & Anr v. Manik Lal Banerjee, extracted supra, it is clear
that the interpretation clause in Section 2(e) of Payment of Gratuity Act
takes out from the purview of the said Act, a person who holds, inter alia,
post under the Central Government and whose terms and conditions of
service are governed by an Act or the Rules providing for payment of
gratuity. It is also observed in Manik Lal Banerjee that the Railway
Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 provide for payment of gratuity under Rule
Page 38 of 40
OA No.21/323/2021 & Batch
70 to Railway servants. Thus, the Hon‟ble Apex Court held that the claim
of Manik Lak Banerjee, who was a Railway employee, that his case shall
be governed by Gratuity Act cannot be accepted.
Union Of India & Anr vs Manik Lal Banerjee on 26 July, 2006
On a combined reading of the judgments of the Hon‟ble Apex Court in
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Dharam Prakash Sharma & ors, and
Union of India & Anr v. Manik Lal Banerjee, extracted supra, it is clear
that the interpretation clause in Section 2(e) of Payment of Gratuity Act
takes out from the purview of the said Act, a person who holds, inter alia,
post under the Central Government and whose terms and conditions of
service are governed by an Act or the Rules providing for payment of
gratuity. It is also observed in Manik Lal Banerjee that the Railway
Services (Pension) Rules, 1993 provide for payment of gratuity under Rule
Page 38 of 40
OA No.21/323/2021 & Batch
70 to Railway servants. Thus, the Hon‟ble Apex Court held that the claim
of Manik Lak Banerjee, who was a Railway employee, that his case shall
be governed by Gratuity Act cannot be accepted.
Section 4 in THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 [Entire Act]
Y.K. Singla vs Punjab National Bank & Ors on 14 December, 2012
(iii) In Y.K. Singla v. Punjab National Bank & Ors (supra) it has
been held as under
Section 7 in THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 [Entire Act]
Beed District Central Co-Operative ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 29 September, 2006
(ii) In Beed District Central Coop. Bank Ltd v. State of
Maharashtra & Others, it has been held as under: