JUDGEMENT
SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. -
(1.) A short but important question arises for
consideration in this writ petition as to whether
a principal of the aided non-Government
Educational Institution is an "employee"
within the meaning of Section 2(e) of the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter
referred to as "the Act") and the benefit of the
Payment of Gratuity can be extended to him or
not?
(2.) Petitioner No. 1 is the Administrator
and petitioner No. 2 is the Principal, Lahidhi
Multipurpose Higher Secondary School,
Chirimiri, Distt. Korea (C.G.). This is a
non-Governmental aided higher secondary
school. The case of the petitioners is that late
Roopnarayan Chaturvedi was appointed in this
institution on July 20, 1966. He died during
service on September 21, 2001. His wife
namely Smt. Vidyavati Chaturvedi, respondent
No. 1 herein, made an application for Payment
of Gratuity before the management of the
institution but the same was dismissed.
Thereafter, she moved to the Controlling
Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act and
the said authority passed his order dated January
31, 2004 and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,99,298/-as
the amount of gratuity payable to respondent
No. 1. The contention of the petitioners is that
since the deceased was a "teacher" in their
institution, therefore, he is not an "employee"
within the meaning of the aforesaid Act, as such,
no benefit of payment of gratuity can be extended
to his legal representative (respondent No. 1) and
the application before the controlling authority
was not maintainable. The controlling authority
erred in law in exercising jurisdiction under
Section 4 of the aforesaid Act and the order
passed by controlling authority should be
quashed.
(3.) Reply on behalf of respondent No. 1
has been filed. It is contended by respondent
No. 1 that her husband was initially appointed
as a teacher in the said institution in the year
1966 but he, was promoted to the post of
Principal by the Management vide order dated
March 1, 19^9 and the aforesaid order of the
Management was approved and confirmed by
the competent authority of the Government vide
order dated November 6, 1989. Copies of these
two orders have been placed on record as
Annexures R-1/1 and R-J/2. It is contended by
her that the principal of an aided
non-Government educational institution is an
"employee" within the meaning of Section 2(e)
of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and he
will be entitled for the benefits of gratuity under
the law. By way of filing rejoinder the
petitioners have contended that though the
deceased was working as a Principal, but he
himself had filed an application dated
December 14, 1996 before the President that
he is resigning from the post of Principal and
he can serve the institution as a teacher in
English. They have submitted the copy of the
resignation letter as Annexure P-3. They have
also contended vide para 2 of the rejoinder that
at the time of holding the post of Principal, the
deceased was also taking 3 periods of English
subject in different classes daily, therefore, the
deceased was doing the work of a teacher also.
They have annexed copy of the time-table as
Annexure P-4. There is an endorsement in the
aforesaid resignation letter dated December 14,
1996, "to be put before the Managing
Committee". No documents in relation to the
acceptance of this letter has been filed nor it has
been pleaded that the resignation was accepted
and the deceased after resignation from the post
of Principal was working as a teacher in the
said institution.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.