Providing much-needed relief to a teacher whose gratuity claims were challenged by his college management, the Bombay High Court bench here has ruled that a teacher is an 'employee' and is entitled to all such service benefits.
"There is no escape but to hold that a teacher is an 'employee' within the meaning of Section 2(e) of Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and hence, its provisions are applicable to him," a single-judge bench comprising Justice Ravi Deshpande has observed.
The HC dismissed the petition filed by Vidarbha Youth Welfare Institution (Society), an educational institution, challenging the order of Assistant Labour Commissioner (controlling authority), Amravati, directing it to pay a gratuity of Rs 3.5 lakh with interest amounting to Rs 1.2 lakh to a 65-year-old teacher Pradip Kumar Lambhate.
The Judge also asked the petitioner society to pay an additional Rs 27,872 as interest at 10 per cent per annum.
The Pune-based teacher was appointed as Principal by the petitioner society in its social work college on May 10, 1995. He retired on attainting the age of superannuation on May 31, 2005. Citing provisions of the Gratuity Act, he then applied to the Controlling Authority seeking a directive to the petitioner society to pay gratuity along with the interest.
His application was allowed by the controlling authority while the appellate authority dismissed the society's appeal.
The Society then moved to the higher judiciary contending that teachers are not employed in 'managerial' or 'administrative' capacity. And occasionally, even if they do some administrative work as part of their duty, they cannot be held employed in either capacity since their main job is to impart education.