Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank Jodhpur Vs Appellate Authority (Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur)
Appeal Number : D.B. Spl. Appl. Writ No. 561/2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 05/01/2022
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank Vs Appellate Authority (Rajasthan High Court)

Facts- The writ petition was filed by the bank challenging an order dated 20.07.2020 passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter to be referred to as the ‘Act of 1972’) partly confirming the order dated 28.03.2018 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Act of 1972. The petitioner bank is a Gramin Bank operating in the State of Rajasthan. The respondent Kheem Singh Rathore was an officer of the bank. He retired on superannuation w.e.f. 30.09.2016. At the time of his retirement, the bank had paid him gratuity of Rs.10,30,319/-. He later on approached the Controlling Authority and disputed the amount of gratuity paid to him by the employer bank. His grievance was that while calculating the gratuity, the bank had not taken into account the dearness allowance component of his pay.

The Controlling Authority, by an order dated 28.03.2018 allowed the application. The said authority was of the opinion that the dearness allowance component ought to have been taken into account while computing the last pay drawn for the purpose of payment of gratuity. He also held that for every completed year of service beyond 30 years, the applicant would receive an additional gratuity at the rate of salary for one and a half months.

Conclusion-

Regulation 72(1) provides that an officer or employee shall be eligible for payment of gratuity either as per the provisions of the Act of 1972 or as per Sub-regulation (2) whichever is higher. Thus, it is beyond doubt that an employee must receive gratuity whichever is more beneficial either under the Act of 1972 or under the Regulations framed by the bank. However, this is not the same thing as to suggest that an employee can choose computation of gratuity under one statute and seek benefits of other provisions under another statute. As we have noticed, the scheme of gratuity under the Act of 1972 and under the regulations framed by the bank are different.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031