SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES versus GURSEWAK SINGH & ORS.

Citation: [2019] 2 S.C.R. 1025 · Decided: 15-03-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: UDAY UMESH LALIT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1025
SR. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES
v.
GURSEWAK SINGH & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No. 3150 of 2019)
MARCH 15, 2019
[UDAY UMESH LALIT AND INDU MALHOTRA, JJ.]
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972:
ss. 4(1) and 2(e) – Gramin Dak Sewak – Payment of gratuity
under the 1972 Act – Entitlement of – Held: Gramin Dak Sewak-
respondent No. 1 not entitled to payment of gratuity – s. 2(e) defining
term ‘employee’ specifically excludes persons who are governed by
any Act, or Rules providing for payment of Gratuity – Gramin Dak
Sewaks are engaged as Extra Departmental Agents, a post governed
by the Gramin Dak Sewak Rules, 2011, having a separate provision
for payment of Gratuity to the Extra Departmental Agents – Thus,
Gramin Dak Sewak is not an “employee” under the 1972 Act – In
terms of r. 6(13) no Gratuity is payable if an Extra-Departmental
Agent quits the agency on his own – On facts, respondent No. 1
tendered his resignation and order accepting his resignation was
passed u/r. 6(13) permitting respondent no. 1 to quit the services of
the Gramin Dak Sewak as per his voluntary resignation – Thus,
respondent no. 1 became disentitled from the payment of gratuity
under the 2011 Rules applicable to Gramin Dak Sewaks – Gramin
Dak Sewak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011 – rr. 6(1), 6(13),
3-A (i).
Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Section 1(3)(b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act,
1972 Act applies to every ‘establishment’ within the meaning of
“any law” for the time being in force. The Post Office Act, 1898
would fall under the expression ‘law’ in Section 1(3)(b). Thus,
the Post & Telegraphs Department would be an ‘establishment’
under the 1972 Act. [Para 9.1][1043-D, G]
1.2 Section 4(1) of the 1972 Act, provides for payment of
Gratuity to an employee on the termination of his employment,
subject to the condition that he must have rendered a minimum
[2019] 2 S.C.R. 1025
1025
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1026                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS            [2019] 2 S.C.R.
of 5 years’ continuous service. Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act,
however specifically excludes persons who are governed by any
Act, or Rules providing for payment of Gratuity.  Section 4 of the
1972 Act, states that “Gratuity shall be payable to an employee”.
The term ‘employee’ is defined by Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act.
Section 2(e) of the 1972 Act excludes persons who hold a post
with the Central or State Government and are governed by any
other Act or rules providing for payment of gratuity. Gramin Dak
Sewaks are engaged as Extra Departmental Agents, a post
governed by the Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct and
Engagement) Rules, 2011. These Rules have a separate provision
for payment of Gratuity to the Extra Departmental Agents. A
Gramin Dak Sewak is not an “employee” under the 1972 Act.
[Para 9.2-9.4][1035-H; 1037-D-F]
1.3 The 2011 Rules provide that Gramin Dak Sewaks are
Extra-Departmental Agents, who are outside the Civil Service of
the Union, and shall not claim to be at par with the Central
Government Employees. The Extra-Departmental Agents are
engaged by the Department of Posts & Telegraphs to cater to
the postal requirements in the rural and remote areas. The system
avails the services of schoolmasters, shopkeepers, landlords, and
such other persons in a village who have a reasonable standard
of literacy, and adequate means of livelihood, and can therefore
assist the Department on a part-time basis by way of gainful
avocation, to provide service to the rural communities for their
postal requirements. Rule 3-A(i) of the 2011 Rules provides that
the Gramin Dak Sewaks shall not be required to perform duties
beyond a maximum period of 5 hours a day. This shows the
avocational nature of the service. Rule 6(1) of the 2011 Rules
provides for payment of gratuity to Gramin Dak Sewaks. However,
Rule 6(13) states that no Gratuity is payable if an
Extra-Departmental Agent quits the agency on his own.
[Para 10.1][1037-H; 1038-A-D]
1.4 In the instant case, respondent No. 1 tendered his
resignation in 2014. The appellant-Department accepted his
resignation. The order accepting the resignation of respondent
No. 1 was passed under Rule 6(13) permitting respondent No. 1
to quit the services of the Gramin Dak Sewak as per his voluntary
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1027
resignation. As a consequence of his resignation, respondent
No. 1 became disentitled from the payment of Gratuity under the
statutory 2011 Rules applicable to Gramin Dak Sewaks.
[Para 10.2][1038-E; 1039-A-B]
1.5 The impugned Or

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.