Provision Enabling Employee To Get Higher Gratuity Prevails Over One That Limits The Gratuity Amount
Case: Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd v. S. Viswanathamallan & Anr
Coram: Justice A.K Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Mohammed Nias C.P
Case No.: WA NO. 758 OF 2022
Court Observation: “Thus, when two choices are available, one under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act and the other under such arrangement with the employer and if the latter offers better terms, the employee cannot be denied the right to receive those higher benefits.”
“These judgments against the very same bank cover the issue on all fours and we are in complete agreement with the proposition laid down in them. We also note that the judgment in WP(C)No. 27507 of 2013 and WP(C)No.1023 of 2019 have become final in the absence of a challenge to the same by the bank and after accepting the same, it was not open to the appellant to contend against the findings in those cases over again.”
“It is pertinent to note that the bank is enjoined to act as a model employer whose actions on all fronts, including in the matter of payment of gratuity to its employees, must be informed by fairness in action.” “The non-obstante clause contained in Section 4(5) of the Payment of Gratuity Act has an overriding effect over all the other sub-sections under Section 4 and the Regulations must be taken as a contract within the meaning of Section 4(5) of the Payment of Gratuity Act.”
Previous Posts
Karnataka High Court Dismisses Grasim’s Plea Against Increase In Employees Retirement Age To 60 Yrs
S. 50 Of NDPS Act- Presence Of Magistrate During Search Of Contraband Articles Not Mandatory If Accused Waives His Right: Delhi High Court Download Judgement
Keywords
Provision Enabling Employee, Gratuity Prevails, Gratuity Amount
