SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES IDUKKI DIVISION Vs. REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL) AND CONTROLLING AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above cases relate to the applicability and entitlement of of the Gramin Dak Sewaks i.e., Extra Departmental Agents to receive gratuity under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') or whether they are governed by the Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011, which came into force on 18/4/2011 in supercession of the Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2001. For convenience, the above cases are divided into two categories. The first batch of cases are of the Gramin Dak Sewaks who retired after 18/4/2011 and the second batch of employees who retired prior to 18/4/2011 when the Gramin Dak Sewak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2001 was in force. By the orders impugned in these cases, the controlling authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, found that all the employees are entitled to gratuity as they are covered by the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and had allowed their claims as prayed for.

(2.) The first batch deals with cases covered by Gramin Dak Sevak (Conduct and Engagement) Rules, 2011, and comprise of the following cases. <FRM>JUDGEMENT_212_LAWS(KER)12_2022_1.html</FRM>

(3.) The issues involved in these cases are whether the Postal Department is an establishment under the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and also whether a Gramin Dak Sewak is an "employee" as per Sec. 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 Act, and is entitled to payment of gratuity under the said Act? The questions are no loner res integra as the issue raised in the above cases is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices v. Gurusewak Singh and others (2019 KHC 6339).