LALAPPA LINGAPPA & ORS. versus LAXMI VISHNU TEXTILE MILLS LTD., SHOLAPUR

LALAPPA LINGAPPA & ORS. versus LAXMI VISHNU TEXTILE MILLS LTD., SHOLAPUR

Permanent employees are not entitled to gratuity for years in which they were absent without leave and actually worked less than 240 days; badli workers are not entitled to gratuity for the badli period unless actually employed for 240 days in the relevant years. The statutory scheme and plain language require actual employment for the prescribed period, and merely being on rolls or reporting for work does not suffice.

Parties
Appellants: Lalappa Lingappa & Ors.; Respondent: Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills Ltd., Sholapur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 February 1981
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court – Final Judgment After Appeals From High Court and Industrial Court
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Gratuity, Continuous Service, Statutory Interpretation
Labour Law Social Welfare Legislation Gratuity Continuous Service Statutory Interpretation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lalappa Lingappa & Ors.

Appellants

Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills Ltd., Sholapur

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court – Final Judgment After Appeals From High Court and Industrial Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permanent workers on unauthorised leave are entitled to gratuity under section 4(1) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 for years in which they actually worked less than 240 days
  2. 2 Whether badli workers are entitled to gratuity for the period prior to their permanency irrespective of actual days worked

Ratio Decidendi

Permanent employees are not entitled to gratuity for years in which they were absent without leave and actually worked less than 240 days; badli workers are not entitled to gratuity for the badli period unless actually employed for 240 days in the relevant years. The statutory scheme and plain language require actual employment for the prescribed period, and merely being on rolls or reporting for work does not suffice.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • There shall be no order as to costs.