Shivani Pandey –
Published on August 05, 2021, at 12:24 PM
The Delhi High Court recently observed that a Vocational Teacher engaged with the Delhi Government is entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the concerned legislation does not differentiate between ad hoc and full-time employees.
Justice V. Kameswar Rao was hearing a petition filed by an ad hoc employee in the banking course by the Directorate of Education, Delhi Government in 1991.
In the Petition, the Petitioner stated that he was entitled to the Gratuity under the ambit of Act of 1972 with effect from April 3, 1997, as ad hoc teachers that fall under the ambit of the legislation cannot be denied the same.
“The petitioner is an employee, though according to the respondents Part-Time, he is still entitled to gratuity. He worked for almost 28-29 years but was denied the benefit of pension as he was not a regular employee,” the Court remarked.
The Delhi Government in response stated that Petitioner’s appointment was on a contingent basis conditional to his services being terminated at any time.
Thus the Court observed that, “From the above, it is clear that the Act does not draw a distinction between a full-time employee / a part-time employee /ad hoc employee etc. In other words, as stated by the Court, the Section does not speak of any specific categories of the employees for its applicability i.e. regular, ad-hoc, part-time, casual etc.”
In addition to the Court stated that “Being a so-called “Part-Time Employee”, if he is not entitled to gratuity under the scheme prevailing in the department, the petitioner is entitled to gratuity under the Act of 1972. He cannot be left without means of sustenance, post-retirement.
The Court directed the Respondent to pay gratuity by counting the period of service with effect from April 30, 1997 till March 26, 2020 with the interest calculated @ 6% p.a.
Click here to Download/Read the Order
Also read: Right to Education- Constitutional Insight