Cal HC | On failure of State’s duty to disburse the gratuity and pension amount on the due date, interest is obligatory
Calcutta High Court: Amrita Sinha, J. disposed of a petition which was filed by an Assistant Teacher who retired from service on
Calcutta High Court: Amrita Sinha, J. disposed of a petition which was filed by an Assistant Teacher who retired from service on
Supreme Court: Reversing the concurrent findings of the Single Judge and Division Bench of Kerala High Court, the Bench of S. Abdul
Gujarat High Court: Biren Vaishnav, J., reiterated that, interest on delayed payment of gratuity is mandatory and not discretionary. The petitioner had
Madhya Pradesh High Court: Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J. allowed a writ petition which was filed assailing the legality, validity and propriety of
Supreme Court: In a detailed judgment stressing on the importance of the work done by the Anganwadi workers/helpers at the grassroot level,
Supreme Court: In an interesting case where the Division Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul* and M.M. Sundresh, JJ., was to answer whether
Saket Courts, New Delhi: Naresh Kumar Laka, Additional District Judge – 03 decided a matter wherein an employee claimed full back wages
Uttaranchal High Court: The Division Bench of Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ. and Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, J., allowed a petition which was filed
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ., addressed whether the 2010 amendment of Payment of Gratuity Act
Tripura High Court: Akil Kureshi, CJ., dismissed a writ petition which was filed aggrieved about non-payment of gratuity and pension after retirement.
by Akaant Kumar Mittal† and Lavanya Jha††
Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 51
The observation came in a case where a SAIL employee had retained a quarter after his retirement due to non-payment of retiral benefits.
National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT): The Coram of Dr Deepti Mukesh (Judicial Member) and Sumita Purkayastha (Technical Member), reiterated that any shortfall in
Allahabad High Court: While deciding the petition in favour of the petitioner, Manish Kumar, J., prohibited the U.P. Government from adjusting the
Supreme Court: In a 2:1 verdict, the 3-judge bench of Arun Mishra, MR Shah and Ajay Rastogi, JJ has held that the
Jharkhand High Court: Dr S.N. Pathak, J., allowed the present petition, directing the respondents to make payment of the entire retiral benefits
Supreme Court: In the case where the employees of Municipal Corporation governed by the Uttar Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1959 claimed gratuity
Ministry of Finance has enhanced the income tax exemption for gratuity under Section 10 (10) (iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
Patna High Court: The Division Bench comprising of A. P. Sahi, CJ and Anjana Mishra, J. allowed a civil writ petition seeking
Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of S.C. Gupte, J. dismissed a writ petition which was filed challenging the forfeiture