<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (7) TMI 684 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187777</link>
    <description>A dismissal of special leave, without consideration of the controlling statutory provisions, does not lay down binding law and is not authoritative on the applicability of the gratuity statute to railway servants. The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 excludes a railway employee who holds a post under the Central Government and is governed by the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, which contain their own gratuity scheme and method for determining emoluments. Later pay commission recommendations applied prospectively and could not be used to recompute retirement benefits for an employee who had retired before their operative date. The enhanced gratuity claim was therefore rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jan 2017 11:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=446885" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 684 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187777</link>
      <description>A dismissal of special leave, without consideration of the controlling statutory provisions, does not lay down binding law and is not authoritative on the applicability of the gratuity statute to railway servants. The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 excludes a railway employee who holds a post under the Central Government and is governed by the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, which contain their own gratuity scheme and method for determining emoluments. Later pay commission recommendations applied prospectively and could not be used to recompute retirement benefits for an employee who had retired before their operative date. The enhanced gratuity claim was therefore rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=187777</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>