Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
 
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
« Top Headlines »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 8 reasons why old tax regime is still attractive for many taxpayers in this income tax bracket
 March 31 deadline is getting near. How to save income tax with tax loss harvesting?
 45-day MSME payment rule: Impact and details of Section 43B(h) explained
 Small savings schemes that offer tax benefits of up to Rs 1.5 lakh under section 80C
 RE-OPENING OF CORRECTION WINDOW FOR MAY 2024 CA EXAMINATIONS
 Powerful Upgrades, Tally 12+1 months renewal Plan and Connected Services for your growing Business - March 2024
 How innovative solutions can help fix the Sec 43B conundrum for MSMEs
 Income Tax dept asks many individuals to explain high value transactions of FY20-21 as Updated ITR deadline nears
 Release Notes for TallyPrime and TallyPrime Edit Log Release 4.1 | What s New!
 Deadline to file updated ITR FY20-21 ends on March 31: Details on additional tax
 4 tax-planning mistakes to avoid this season

Employer obliged to pay gratuity, should not wait for workers demand
January, 10th 2008
Under Gratuity Act, a terminal benefit was given to workman and contingency for such payment arises immediately on resignation, or retirement or death of such workman, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has ruled.

The law imposed an obligation on employers to pay gratuity and they need not wait for workmen to seek such payment.

In the present case, a driver (A. Pandiarajan) in Madurai Divn I of TN State Transport Corporation was dismissed from service from April 3, 2001 as he was charged with rash and negligent driving.

Petitioners contention

When he moved the authorities seeking gratuity, the Corporation (who is the petitioner) contended that because of loss caused by him due to rash and negligent driving, which amounted to Rs 2 lakh, there was no liability to pay gratuity to him. Also, it was contended that the driver had not furnished his correct wage particulars.

The appellate authority (Joint Commissioner of Labour, Madurai), rejected the Corporations appeal dated April 19, 2006 challenging the order of Assistant Commissioner of Labour.

Plea rejected

Mr Justice K. Chandru, who heard the petition, held that the controlling authority had rightly rejected the Corporations contention. The petitioner did not dispute the details furnished by the employee in Form I, and this Court found no illegality or perversity in the findings of controlling authority.

Court stance

The Corporation, the Judge said, neither passed any order regarding payment of gratuity, nor deprived gratuity payable to the employee on account of alleged loss caused due to accident.

When it had not discharged its obligation, it was not open to the petitioner now to say that the worker should have produced details to prove his wages.

The authorities had recorded a finding of fact with reference to the quantum of wages against the Corporations contention. The petitioner having miserably failed to prove the exact wage of employee could not find fault with the employees attempt to prove the same. The writ petition was dismissed.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2024 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting