Supreme Court: Teachers cannot claim gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act
In the case Birla Institute of Technology vs. State of Jharkhand, the Supreme Court (“SC”) has held that teachers are not covered by the definition of ‘employees’ provided in Section 2 (e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (“Gratuity Act”) and hence, are not eligible to claim gratuity amount under the Gratuity Act. The SC relied on its own decision in the case of Ahmadabad Pvt. Primary Teachers Association vs. Administrative Officer to come to the conclusion that the legislature did not intend to include teachers within the scope of Section 2 (e) of the Gratuity Act. The SC ruled that if the legislature intended to do so, it would have used a wider definition as used in Section 2 (f) of the Employees’ Provident Funds Act, 1952.
As per the SC, a trained teacher is not described in service jurisprudence as a “skilled employee” and that such adjective is generally used for an employee doing manual or technical work. Similarly, the words “semi-skilled” and “unskilled” are not understood in educational establishments as describing nature of job of untrained teachers.
Quick Views:
- The SC has clarified that its decision in this case is only limited to the Gratuity Act and that if there is any other legislation by any state which provides for a wider definition, then the benefit under that legislation can be extended to the employees.
Supreme Court reiterates that grant of specific performance of contract is discretionary and equitable but only after fulfilling certain requirements
The Supreme Court (“SC”), in the case of Kamal Kumar v. Premlata Joshi & Ors has held that the readiness and willingness of the party seeking specific performance is the most important factor to be considered for granting specific performance of the contract.
The SC held that grant of specific performance is a discretionary and equitable relief and the material questions to be answered for granting specific performance are as follows: (i) existence of a valid and concluded contract between the parties; (ii) whether the person seeking specific performance has been ready and willing to perform his/her part of the contract; (iii) if the person seeking specific performance has performed his/her part of the contract, and to what extent and in what manner has this been performed; and if such performance is in conformity with the contract; (iv) if it will be equitable for the court to grant specific performance or will it cause any hardship to the person against whom such an order is made; and (v) whether the person seeking specific performance has any other alternative remedy and on what grounds such alternative remedies are available to him/her.
The SC held that these requirements have to be properly pleaded and proved with the help of evidence and the court can exercise its discretion only when this has been done by the parties.
Quick Views:
- With this decision, the SC has made it clear that although the power to grant specific performance is discretionary, the court has to base its decision on the pleadings of the parties and keeping in mind the interest of the both the parties. The onus, therefore, is on the party claiming specific relief to ensure that it has done all it could do under the contract to claim such specific performance.
UGC invites applications for online degrees by certain universities
In a Public Notice issued by Ministry of Human Resource Development on 4th January, 2019, University Grants Commission (“UGC”) invited applications from all eligible Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) for offering courses in online mode from the academic sessions 2019-20 & onwards.
This new framework will allow institutions to offer certificate, diplomas and degree programmes in only those disciplines in which it has been offering programmes previously at the graduate level. The institutions which meet the following criteria will be allowed to offer their courses in the online mode: (i) the ranking of the institute is within the top 100 of the National Institutional Ranking Framework (approved by the Ministry of Human Resources Development) in the overall category for at least 2 (Two) years in the previous 3 (Three) years; and (ii) the institute has been in existence for at least five years with minimum National Assessment and Accreditation Council (an autonomous UGC institute) accreditation of 3.26 on a 4-point scale.
Quick View:
- The move to allow online degrees should go a long way in ensuring that more people have access to higher education which will have an overall beneficial impact on the Indian economy.
Disclaimer: This post has been prepared for informational purposes only. The information/or observations contained in this post does not constitute legal advice and should not be acted upon in any specific situation without seeking proper legal advice from a practicing attorney.