Continuous service for gratuity includes unauthorized absence unless an express break-in-service order exists.

Unauthorized absence cannot be excluded from continuous service for gratuity purposes unless an express order under the applicable standing orders, rules, or regulations treats that absence as a break in service. Section 2A of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 deems service continuous despite absence from duty without leave, and where no such break-in-service order is shown, the period must be counted. On the facts, the employment relationship was undisputed and no express break order existed, so the employee's gratuity entitlement had to be computed on the basis of continuous service; interference under Articles 226 and 227 was unwarranted.

---

---

Issues: Whether unauthorized absence, in the absence of an express order treating it as break in service, could be excluded from continuous service for the purpose of gratuity.

Analysis: Section 2A of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 treats service as continuous even where it is interrupted by absence from duty without leave, unless there is an order under the applicable standing orders, rules, or regulations treating such absence as break in service. Since the employment relationship was undisputed and no express break-in-service order was shown, the period of absence could not be excluded while computing gratuity. The appellate authority's view was therefore not perverse and did not warrant interference under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion: The exclusion of the period of unauthorized absence was rejected, and the employee remained entitled to gratuity on the basis of continuous service.

Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of an express order treating absence from duty as break in service, such absence remains part of continuous service for gratuity purposes under Section 2A of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

---