<?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>2012 (6) TMI 930 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459346</link>
    <description>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&#039;s gratuity entitlement had to be computed on the basis of continuous service; interference under Articles 226 and 227 was unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Dec 2024 19:00:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=781884" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 930 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459346</link>
      <description>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&#039;s gratuity entitlement had to be computed on the basis of continuous service; interference under Articles 226 and 227 was unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459346</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>