Finally, ex-Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad staffer gets gratuity

Dr Jain (right) who was with IIMA from 2005 to 2011 claimed the institute disburses gratuity only to staffers who have completed 30 years of service at the institute
The Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad (IIMA) made an out of court settlement with its former employee, Dr Alok Jain, over legal dispute for payment of gratuity. As per the settlement arrived at by both parties, the premier institute would pay gratuity to Dr Jain as per his demand while leaving the job five years ago.“At the time of final hearing of the petition, advocates for the petitioner (IIMA) and respondent (Dr Jain) jointly submitted that both parties had entered into discussion for overall settlement of the dispute between them and have arrived at a settlement outside the court,” Justice K M Thaker stated while disposing of the plea.
The order said, “The advocates jointly submitted that the parties have agreed to abide by the terms of the settlement arrived at between them outside the court and therefore, the cause to prosecute the petition does not survive.” “The petition has not survived as the parties have arrived at a settlement,” said Dipak Shukla, counsel for Dr Alok Jain, Jain who was with IIMA from 2005 to 2011has been fighting for his gratuity, which he claims the institute disburses only to those employees who have completed 30 years of service at the institute.
He claims that the institute, in the name of autonomy, is violating the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 which states that employees who have completed five years of service at a company are entitled to gratuity. Jain had resigned from the post of manager of the PGPX course in 2011 and is entitled to Rs 1.57 lakh in gratuity. IIMA had filed a petition before Gujarat High Court in 2014 after it lost the case filed by Jain before Appellate Authority of the state labour department on October 30, 2013.
In response to the petition earlier, IIMA had taken the stand that, Dr Jain was not entitled to the benefit as he was governed by the ‘Contributory Provident Fund- cum-Gratuity Rules’ of the institute. “Dr Jain could not have approached the authority of the state government as it is a subject issue of the central government. He is excluded from the definition of ‘employee’ under the Act since he is covered under the Central Provident Fund-cum-Gratuity Rules.” Meanwhile, Dr Jain refused to comment to Mirror over the issue.