Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 19:23
Dear Sir,
In a Private Sector Bank, [allegedly a subsidiary of Public Sector Bank, holding 98% shareholding in this bank], which is a Banking Company within the meanings of The Companies Act 1956 & The Banking Regulation Act 1949, has following provisions in Service condition about Priviledge leave/ Earned Leave:
1. Priviledge leave upto 240 days can be accumulated by an employee during service period, which is encashed on the date of superannuation/ retirement. No other specic provision say in case of resignation is provided i.e. neither barred nor allowed.
2. At the time of resignation the earned / priviledged leave are not allowed to be encashed. However in Parent bank 1/2 of accumulated leave are permitted to be encashed.
My query:
a)whether earned leave/ priviledge leave [which is a right under the law] of an employee can be denied by employer on resignation and whether employer has any right not to allow encashment when earlier employer has denied the same to employee on official exigencies.
b) What provision of Law governs the rules relating to privilege leave. Please note that Partial provisions of The Shop & establishment Act are applicable upon the Bank.
c)Service conditions interalia provides that at the time of resignation three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is provided which may be termed as liquidated damages and when appointment contract provides for specific liquidated damages, whether employer is entitled to add more damages by way of forfieting priviledge /earned leave.
An early clarification is solicited.
Thanks & regards.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 19:21
Dear Sir,
In a Private Sector Bank, [allegedly a subsidiary of Public Sector Bank, holding 98% shareholding in this bank], which is a Banking Company within the meanings of The Companies Act 1956 & The Banking Regulation Act 1949, has following provisions in Service condition about Priviledge leave/ Earned Leave:
1. Priviledge leave upto 240 days can be accumulated by an employee during service period, which is encashed on the date of superannuation/ retirement. No other specic provision say in case of resignation is provided i.e. neither barred nor allowed.
2. At the time of resignation the earned / priviledged leave are not allowed to be encashed. However in Parent bank 1/2 of accumulated leave are permitted to be encashed.
My query:
a)whether earned leave/ priviledge leave [which is a right under the law] of an employee can be denied by employer on resignation and whether employer has any right not to allow encashment when earlier employer has denied the same to employee on official exigencies.
b) What provision of Law governs the rules relating to privilege leave. Please note that Partial provisions of The Shop & establishment Act are applicable upon the Bank.
c)Service conditions interalia provides that at the time of resignation three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is provided which may be termed as liquidated damages and when appointment contract provides for specific liquidated damages, whether employer is entitled to add more damages by way of forfieting priviledge /earned leave.
An early clarification is solicited.
Thanks & regards.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 18:38
Dear Sir,
I am working with a Private sector Bank. As per service regulations applicable, the privilege leave are permitted to be accumulated upto 240 days. These leave are permitted to be encashed at the time of superannuation/ retirement. However, if an employee resigns the Bank do not encash the same. There is no specific provision in this regard about the refusal of encashment. The Service conditions further stipulates that at the time of resigantion three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is permitted- That is to say that liquidated damages on resignation is three months notice or payment in lieu thereof specifically provided. Thus refusal of priviledge leave is arbitary.
The Banks are also governed by partial provisions of Shop & Establishment Act.
My query is whether priviledge leave earned during course of employment can be forfieted by employer when liquidated damages are already provided for resignation. Secondly, which Act governs the leave rules in case of Private sector Bank, which is basically a Banking Company within the meanings of the Companies Act 1956 & The banking Regulation Act 1949.
An early reply is solicited.
Thanks & Regard.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 18:37
Dear Sir,
I am working with a Private sector Bank. As per service regulations applicable, the privilege leave are permitted to be accumulated upto 240 days. These leave are permitted to be encashed at the time of superannuation/ retirement. However, if an employee resigns the Bank do not encash the same. There is no specific provision in this regard about the refusal of encashment. The Service conditions further stipulates that at the time of resigantion three months notice or payment in lieu thereof is permitted- That is to say that liquidated damages on resignation is three months notice or payment in lieu thereof specifically provided. Thus refusal of priviledge leave is arbitary.
The Banks are also governed by partial provisions of Shop & Establishment Act.
My query is whether priviledge leave earned during course of employment can be forfieted by employer when liquidated damages are already provided for resignation. Secondly, which Act governs the leave rules in case of Private sector Bank, which is basically a Banking Company within the meanings of the Companies Act 1956 & The banking Regulation Act 1949.
An early reply is solicited.
Thanks & Regard.
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 18:21
Dear Experts of the forum,
What is P T mean in the contest of A P Revenue records.
Suppose a person name appears in the column ( of Land Revenue Records of Andhra Pradesh) as a Kowldhar (Cultivater) for a period of 15 years during 1974 to 1984.And all these time the original OWNER Name is carried in the column of pattedhar, and after 1984 up to 1989, from 1993till to day even in the Cultivater column. Can a Cultivater has any Rights on the land , can he sell the land to a third person? If he sells, what is the fate of the purchaser.
Thank you all in advance.
Sudhir Indapurkar
23 November 2009 at 18:06
Remedy open to assessee after completion of assessement is either to file Appeal with CIT Appeals or file Revision pettition with Commissioner of Income Tax.In one of the cases Assessement order u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153C has been passed with specific approval of Commissioner of Income tax.Is it proper? Can assessee go for revision against such assessement order?
Prashant
23 November 2009 at 17:37
Dear All
I am going to join new company from Dec 09. My CTC includes "Reimbursement of medical expenses" worth Rs 1250/- p.m. The said amount will be paid to me against the submission of medical bills. if I don't provide the bills then it will be paid at the end of the year after deducting the Income Tax.
Now my question is, my mother underwent heavy medical treatment & I have medical bills worth Rs 1.00 lakh but they are pertaining to Sept 09. So can I submit these bills to my new company & claim the reimbursement against these bills becasue when I incurred this expenses, I was not in this company.
Can I claim these bills till 31-03-2010
Thanks in advance
Anonymous
23 November 2009 at 17:16
My question is how to communicate further on the same query that I ask, as in when I get replies to my query how do I correspond with those people/lawyers incase of clarification etc?
pratik
23 November 2009 at 16:34
1) If any thing is written in the book published by the publisher but written by the lawyer, ca, cs or any degree holder or any PHD person in any filed and the book or article written is not write than who is liable for the wrong judgment taken by the person who was reading the book or article?
2) As per which section, rule, order or act the following person known as publisher or writer is in default or we can see how has made an offence & who is punishable ? please any kind of article or case laws or section mentioned the penalty & most imp the proceed.
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
CpcSECTION23
There is a judgement by supreme court on the point that power to transfer the civil case 4m one state to other state is only with supreme court. Section 23(3) has been made redundant by 1976 amendment. Can any expert provide of the citation 4 that judgement. Thanks