3. Ahemdabad Pre. Primary Teachers' Association vs. Adminis- trative Authority, (2004) SCC 755

Sub:- This case is based on Section 2(c) of the Payment of Gratuity Act

Facts of the case :-

1. Respondent No.2 was a teacher in a school run by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation.

2. He demanded gratuity under the Minimum Wages Act.

High Court :-The High Court dismissed the demand.

Supreme Court:-

The Court held that 'workman' has been defined under Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.

'Workman' means any person including a trainee is also em- ployed in any industry to do any skilled or unskilled, manual, super- visory, technical or clerical work for fare or reward, whether the term of such employment are expressed or implied and they will all be known as workman who have been removed or discharged in connection with a dispute or as a result of dispute or who have been retrenched or the said dispute has arisen as a result of their removal, discharge or retrenchment.

Whether an educational institution come under the category of an industry?

The Court has kept any educational institution or university out from the scope of an industry because such ventures depend on the intellectual development.

 Spreading of education is a mission, not a trade, occupation or business, howsoever, wide are the activities of such institution, but educational institutions will not come under the category of an industry.

While delivering the judgment in the instant case, the Supreme Court held that a teacher is not an employee because a school is not an industry therefore they are not entitled to get a gratuity.

Judgment: Appeal dismissed

Law points :-

1. No educational institution come under the category of an industry.

2. A teacher working in a school does not come under the category of a workman.

3. A teacher working in a school is not entitled to get a gratuity.