SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES versus GURSEWAK SINGH & ORS.

SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES versus GURSEWAK SINGH & ORS.

Gramin Dak Sewaks are governed by a separate set of rules (Gramin Dak Sewak Rules, 2011) which provide their own gratuity scheme; Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 excludes persons so governed. Since respondent voluntarily resigned, Rule 6(13) disentitles him from gratuity. Therefore, Gramin Dak Sewak is not an ‘employee’ under the 1972 Act and not entitled to gratuity under the Act on voluntary resignation under the 2011 Rules.

Parties
Appellant: Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices; Respondents: Gursewak Singh & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed; High Court orders set aside
Legal Topics
Payment of Gratuity, Statutory Interpretation, Applicability of Payment of Gratuity Act to Gramin Dak Sewaks, Resignation and Gratuity Entitlement
Labour Law Service Law Payment of Gratuity Statutory Interpretation Applicability of Payment of Gratuity Act to Gramin Dak Sewaks Resignation and Gratuity Entitlement

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices

Appellant

Gursewak Singh & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Gramin Dak Sewak is an ‘employee’ under Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and entitled to payment of gratuity under the Act
  2. 2 Whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is eligible for payment of gratuity under the 2011 Rules upon voluntary resignation

Ratio Decidendi

Gramin Dak Sewaks are governed by a separate set of rules (Gramin Dak Sewak Rules, 2011) which provide their own gratuity scheme; Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 excludes persons so governed. Since respondent voluntarily resigned, Rule 6(13) disentitles him from gratuity. Therefore, Gramin Dak Sewak is not an ‘employee’ under the 1972 Act and not entitled to gratuity under the Act on voluntary resignation under the 2011 Rules.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; High Court orders set aside

Orders

  • Impugned orders of the Punjab & Haryana High Court are set aside.
  • Pending applications in both the Appeals are dismissed.