jagadish paranjape
26 April 2011 at 12:33
Model standing orders are applicable to a company.
Inspite of this company superannuates workman at the age of 58 years.
In another unit of the same company age of retirement is 60 years.
Can company deviate from model standing orders,in spite of there being no clause relating to retirement in letter of appointment.
Anonymous
26 April 2011 at 12:23
Workman terminated after domestic enquiry
for misconduct.Termination withdrawn
unconditionally and workman joined duty.
Again terminated on the basis of earlier enquiry.
Is it valid?Is there any precedence?
jagadish paranjape
26 April 2011 at 12:21
Workman terminated after domestic enquiry
for misconduct.Termination withdrawn
unconditionally and workman joined duty.
Again terminated on the basis of earlier enquiry.
Is it valid?Is there any precedence?
Lt COL R S shekhawat
26 April 2011 at 09:32
Indian Army is composed o those who have undertaken definite liability for military service, viz, combatant troops, administrative service/departments
and enrolled non-combatants-
The Army Comprises of-.
The Regular Army;
The Army Reserve
& The Territorial Army
services of Territorial army personnel in comparison to other Indian armed FORCES personnel is neither inferior nor services required by the Indian Armed Forces are superior to Territorial army
Existing definition, laid down by the Department of Personnel & Training(DOP&T), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, which has been in vogue since 01 Jul1987,
Ex-servicemen;-
;-Who has served in any rank whether as a combatant or non- combatant in the regular Army, Navy or Air Force of the Indian Union but does not include a person who has served in the Defense Security Corps (DSC), the General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF), the Lok Sahayak Sena and the Para Military Forces
-The personnel of Territorial Army (TA) who are pension holders for continuous embodied service, persons with disability attributable to military service and gallantry award winners released on or after 15 Nov 1986 are eligible to status of ex-servicemen.
Pension & Gallantry award ;- are the compulsory criteria - for the personnel of Territorial Army to attain the status of Ex serviceman which can neither be assured Nor Guaranteed & seems practicably unfeasible abiding the Role\ service concept of Territorial ARMY
Most prominent grievance suffered by Honorably retired officers of TERRITORIAL ARMY ;- -after having served under the same pay band \ rank structure. Governed by the same ARMY Pension Rules,\ Regulation’s .Awarded Gratuity (alike Ex SSCO \ ECO) at par with All those honorably released from Indian military service constitute one class.
It is not LEGAL to single out certain persons of the same class for differential treatment. Denial of Ex-Service men status and ensuing benefits has created a class within a class amongst ALL honorably retired service personnel’s without rational basis and, therefore, becomes arbitrary and discriminatory.
As per GOI, DG E&T .ministry of LABOUR & EMPLOYMENT
service manual part1 National Employment Service Manual Part.I /Vo l.
I page 75 para-11.38
Normally two types of personnel are employed in the Territorial Army, those employed on a part-time basis , and those employed on a full-time basis on the permanent establishment. Obviously, persons falling in the first category and discharged from the Territorial Army should not be considered as Ex-Servicemen e.g - TA personnel’s of NON INFANTRY units called -Departmental TA units of Railway, IOC, ONGC, Telecommunication and General Hospital etc
TA Persons engaged on the permanent staff of the Territorial Army service for varying periods, and on discharge some of them revert to part-time employment in the Territorial Army itself. This part time employment only means a period of training, the duration of which may range from 30 to 60 days in a year. Persons *who serve on the Permanent staff for a period of Six months or more and who on discharge revert to part-time employment in the Territorial Army are to be considered as Discharged Central Government Employees.
TA persons* who are engaged on the permanent staff for a limited number of years should be considered as Discharged Central Government Employees
Exclusion from the definition of Ex-Serviceman for such TA officers* who had honorably been Released\Discharged\Retired with Gratuity alike Non pensioner SSCO \ECO is highly illegal and against the directive of. Govt of India ministry of labor & EMPLOYMENT guidelines of Director general Employment & training.
Officers in the TERRITORIAL ARMY are holding commission ,granted by the president of INDIA with designation of Rank corresponding to those of Indian commissioned officers of the regular Army , Granted Gratuity on their honorable retirement\ Discharge\Release after 05 years of aggregate embodied service / or 10 years of commissioned service alike Non pensioner SSCO\ECO
Yet are not granted EXSERVICEMAN status
ON CONTRARY
Non pensioner Short Service Commissioned Officers . are treated as Ex-servicemen, on their discharge with Gratuity after 05 year commissioned service. inclusive of their pre-commissioning training period as CADET.
Honorably retired officers of TERRITORIAL ARMY are awarded Gratuity at par with All retiree of Indian Army which constitute one class. It is not LEGAL to single out certain persons of the same class for differential treatment. Denial of Ex-Service men status and ensuing benefits has created a class within a class amongst ALL honorably retired officers without rational basis and, therefore, becomes arbitrary and discriminatory.
judiciously commissioned Officers cashiered\ court marshaled \ discharged dishonorably on disciplinary grounds from Indian Armed forces are denied of Ex-Service men status and ensuing benefits
Mohan
26 April 2011 at 09:24
Army has employed approximately 4000 individuals (in 7-8 different organisations in different states) and pays them at casual labour rates. The catch is that all these employees are employed for 25 days with a break followed by fresh employment. Many such individuals have been working in this way for over 25 years. The Army organisation does not encourage formation of any union. Most of these organisations are located in isolated regions with extreme poverty. The Laborers do not raise any demand for fear of loosing their only chance of livelihood. What is the legal view on this. I want to help these people. What should I do?
ramababu
26 April 2011 at 08:04
sir,
i undergone renal transplant 18 yrs ago, and worked hard to fulfill my dream of getting of govt., job. i completed graduation through open system and pg through regular system(got good rank in state common entrance test).after finishing pg i have tried many pvt. jobs in vain (as i have revealed about my medical history).Then one day i have decided to join Govt. service even without revealing my medical history. I worked hard selected into one of famous Govt.services company without disclosing the medical history.
Even after 8 years of service i fear that one day i may loose this Job.(In my life this is the only once i lied). In our country many people get into Govt. services by giving false/fake caste certificates or false/fake qualification certificates etc.,.
Just i want to know what are the implications on me if at all some how my organisation comes to know about my medical history(i know its a crime to subside vital information with the organisation).But to me there is no option left as this is my life time goal, what i actually believed is that when my dad was in service (in central govt), he got all the medical benefits for me through govt., as the govt has already funded me before why not the govt., organisation pardon me and let me continue in service in future.
ANY SUGGESTIONS
Anonymous
25 April 2011 at 22:54
Section 4 (1) of the Payment of Gratuity Act provides that Gratuity shall be payable to an employee on the termination of his employment after he has rendered continuous service for not less than five years-
(a)-----
(b)----
(c)----
(2) For every completed year of service or part thereof in excess of six month, the employer shall pay gratuity to an employee at the rate of fifteen days’ wages based on the rate of wages last drawn by the employee concerned:
Section 4(1) uses the phrase continuous service, whereas continuous service has been defined under section 2(c) of the Act, which provides that “continuous service’ means continuous service as defined in Section 2-A
Section 2-A i.e. the definition of continuous service has been inserted in the statute book by way of amending act 26 of 1984 (with effect from 11.2.1981)
The background for the aforesaid amendment was that on 11.2.1981, the Hon’ble Supreme Court interpreted the provisions of section 2(c) and 4(1) and particularly the emphasis was given on the phrase or words “ actually employed” used in explanation I to Section 2 (c) Please see the judgment i.e. Lalappa Lingappa Vs. Laxmi Vishnu Textile Mills; AIR 1981 SC 852
Since the enforcement of aforesaid ruling has resulted in denial of gratuity to a number of employees, whose short terms absence had remained unregularised due to lack of appreciation of its significance for the purpose of working out their entitlement to gratuity For detail please see the statement of Objects and Reasons of Act 25 of 1984.
The amended provision considered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Jeewallal Limited Vs. Appellate Authority; (1984) 4 SCC 356 and Management of Goodyear India Limited Vs. K.G. Devessar; (1985) 4 SCC 45
Subsequently, a division bench of Hon’ble Karnatake High Court has also considered the provisions of the Section 2-A and 4 in the case of H. Ramappa Vs. General Manager, Sri Yellammma Cotton Woolen and Silk Mills; 2008(117) FLR 863
In view of the aforesaid legal proposition, I am of the view that an employee is eligible only when he serves minimum of 5 years period. While counting the number of years, the last year's service, if more than 6 months to be taken as one year for calculation and in all other years’ employee should work minimum of 240 days.
It is also pertinent to mention here that by virtue of the judgment of Supreme Court rendered under the provisions of the Industrial Dispute Act in Surendra Kumar Verma vs. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal, (1980) (4) S.C.C.433, it is enough that an employee has a service of 240 days in the preceding 12 months and it is not necessary that he should have completed one whole year's service. As the definition of continuous service in Industrial Dispute Act and Payment of Gratuity Act are synonymous, the same principal can be adopted under the act also and hence an employee rendering service of 4 year 10 months 11days is considered to have completed 5 years continuous service under sec.4(2) and thereby is eligible for gratuity.
santosh
25 April 2011 at 19:30
A PSU company made an agreement with its labour union to pay its workers overtime rate at 45/- per hour. the agreement dates back to around 7 years back. No new agreement has come into existence since then. The overtime rate otherwise calculated as per factory act comes to around 400/- per hour. There is a contract ending clause where the contract can be broken but other employees who do not do overtime otherwise eligible for an incentive of around 10000/- per month will be affected.
Can the PSU taken to court for violating factory act. If say whether by individual employee or the labour union
varun kumar
25 April 2011 at 14:49
A store keeper while in service shows the material short from the store amounting to Rs.13 lacs approx and Dept. lodged a complaint against him. During the course of trial the accussed died and the court dismissed the proceddings of the trial and aquitted him from all the charges levelled against him. It may kindly be advised whether the sum which is still outstanding can be recovered from the death benefit of the deceased or not. if not procedure to be adopted further may be apprised please
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Different Policies for Different Class of Employees
Hi All
We are in the process of setting up an inhouse call centre of around 15 people. We come under Bombay Shop & Establishment Act. Our HR policy says 36 Paid Leaves per annum and 4 months PIP against non performance with 3 months notice pay. However for these call centre executives, we would like to propose 21 leaves per annum as defined in the act and 01 month PIP with 01 months notice pay. Can somebody advice if we can adopt different policies for different class of employees.