When Police Search Both The Bag And The Body, Section 50 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed: Supreme Court Settles The Boundaries Of A Critical Safeguard Police Cannot Offer A Third Option During NDPS Search: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal In 11 Kg Charas Case, Holds Section 50 Violation Vitiates Entire Trial Supreme Court Holds Employer Group Insurance Has No Connection With Accidental Death, Cannot Be Set Off Against Motor Accident Compensation Graduating Shouldn't Be A Punishment: Supreme Court Restores Rights Of Anganwadi Workers Denied Supervisor Posts For Being Over-Qualified Trustee Who Diverts Sale Proceeds of Charitable Trust Is an 'Agent' Under Section 409 IPC, Not Exempt From Criminal Breach of Trust: Bombay High Court AFGIS Is 'State' Under Article 12: Supreme Court Reverses Delhi High Court, Restores Writ Petitions of Air Force Insurance Society Employees Delhi High Court Issues Landmark Directions Against Repeated Summoning of Child Victims, Insistence on Presence During Bail Hearings In POCSO 'Accidental Injury' in Hospital Records, All Eye-Witnesses Hostile: Gujarat High Court Acquits Men Convicted for Culpable Homicide After 35 Years Medical Condition Alone Cannot Dilute the Statutory Embargo Under Section 37 NDPS Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court Pre-emption Cannot Wait for Registration When Possession Has Already Changed Hands: Punjab & Haryana High Court Strikes Down Time-Barred Claim Listing a Case for Evidence Is Not Commencement of Trial: Madhya Pradesh High Court Allows Amendment of Plaint in Insurance Dispute Forgery Accused Cannot Be Declared 'Proclaimed Offender': Punjab and Haryana High Court Draws Critical Distinction Between 'Proclaimed Person' and 'Proclaimed Offender' A Two-Line Ex Parte Judgment Is No Judgment In The Eye Of Law: Madras High Court Declares Decree Inexecutable What Was Not Claimed Then Cannot Be Claimed Now: Calcutta High Court Applies Constructive Res Judicata to Bar Second Partition Suit Unregistered Family Settlement Creates No Rights in Immovable Property: Delhi High Court Rejects Brother's Ownership Claim Police Must Protect Lawful Possession When Civil Court Decree Is Defied: Kerala High Court Upholds Purchase Certificate Holder’s Rights Over Alleged Temple Claim One Mark Short, No Right to Appointment: Patna High Court Dismisses Engineer's Claim to Vacancies Left by Non-Joining Candidates Bombay High Court Binds MCA to Arbitration as "Veritable Party" in T20 League Dispute Silence in the Witness Box Can Sink Your Case: ‘Non-Examination Leads to Presumption Against Party’ — Andhra Pradesh High Court Sale Deed Holder With Registered Title Prevails Over Claimant Under Mere Agreement To Sell: Karnataka High Court Candidate With 'Third Child' Disqualification Cannot Escape Consequence By Avoiding Cross-Examination: Supreme Court

Gratuity is an entitlement of the employee… the Municipality is not showing any charity by releasing gratuity – Calcutta HC Reiterates Right to Interest on Delayed Gratuity Payments

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Calcutta High Court has affirmed the entitlement of employees to interest on delayed gratuity payments, reinforcing that “Gratuity is an entitlement of the employee who has rendered uninterrupted and honourable service to the municipality… the Municipality as the employer is not showing any charity by releasing gratuity in favour of its retired employees.”

Facts and Legal Background:

Amiya Kumar Roy, a retired employee of the Bhatpara Municipality, did not receive his gratuity post-retirement on February 28, 2018. Following a legal battle initiated in 2020, the High Court had previously ordered the gratuity payment within eight weeks on August 5, 2021, leaving the question of interest for delayed payment open.

Despite the Municipality’s claims of financial hardships, the court noted that such constraints do not exempt an employer from fulfilling statutory obligations such as timely gratuity payments. The Municipality’s subsequent appeal challenged an additional demand for interest, which was addressed in the current proceedings.

Detailed Court Assessment and Ruling:

The bench, consisting of Hon’ble Justice Arijit Banerjee and Hon’ble Justice Prasenjit Biswas, meticulously rejected the Municipality’s argument based on the doctrines of waiver and estoppel, aligning with previous judgments that upheld employees’ rights to interest on delayed payments under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

Right to Gratuity and Interest: The court highlighted that gratuity, a statutory right under Section 7(3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, ensures a dignified post-retirement life for employees. Interest compensates for delays in gratuity payments, underpinning the survival and dignity of retired workers.

Statutory Obligations over Financial Excuses: The judges noted that financial difficulties cited by the Municipality do not justify delays in gratuity payments, emphasizing that the obligations to pay gratuity and applicable interest are statutory and not conditional on the employer’s financial status.

Interest Rate Application: The court upheld the interest rate of 10% per annum, as specified by the Central Government, from the due date to the actual payment date. However, the court set aside the lower court’s directive for an additional 3% interest for further delays post-judgment, marking a critical assessment of the lawful interest limits.

Conclusion and Modification of Orders:

The Calcutta High Court directed Bhatpara Municipality to pay the due gratuity with a 10% annual interest rate within eight weeks from the judgment date. The decision to award an additional interest of 3% beyond the statutory maximum was reversed, adhering strictly to the legal provisions.

Date of Decision: May 3, 2024

Bhatpara Municipality v. Amiya Kumar Roy & Ors

Latest Legal News