MANAGING COMMITTEE MOHANMIDDLE SCHOOL Vs. JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A challenge has been laid by the petitioner to order dated June 9, 2005 passed by the Joint labour Commissioner-cum-Appellate authority.

(2.) THE brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent no. 3 retired as a Teacher from the petitioner's school on August 31, 2000. She submitted an application to the Controlling Authority for the payment of gratuity on January 30, 2002 under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The application was resisted by the petitioner by way of detailed reply. A specific stand was taken by the petitioner before the Controlling authority that respondent No. 3 being a teacher did not fall within the ambit of definition given in Section 2 (e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The Controlling Authority directed the petitioner on November 27, 2003 to pay gratuity within 30 days to respondent No. 3. The petitioner preferred an appeal under section 7 (7) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 assailing the order dated November 27, 2003 before the Appellate Authority. The appeal was dismissed by the Appellate authority on June 9, 2005. The petitioner has assailed the order dated June 9, 2005.

(3.) MR. K. D. Sood, advocate strenuously argued that the order passed by the Controlling authority as well as Appellate Authority dated november 27, 2003 and June 9, 2005 are not sustainable in the eyes of law. He further contended that respondent No. 3 being a teacher did not fall within the expression 'employee' and this position has been settled by the Hon'ble supreme Court in case Ahmedabad Private primary Teachers' Association v. Administrative Officer and Others, AIR 2004 sc 1426: (2004) 1 SCC 755 :2004-I-LLJ-596.