Urgent.News

What's breaking now, across thousands of outlets.

Tech

Bombay HC Directs Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust To Pay ₹11.67 Lakh Gratuity To Former Manager

Mumbai, September 2, 2026: Holding that an employer cannot keep an employee waiting endlessly for gratuity, the Bombay High Court has dismissed a plea by the Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust challenging an order directing it to pay Rs 11.67 lakh to its former manager, who served the club for 23 years. Justice Sandeep Marne, on September 1, also imposed costs of Rs 1 lakh on the Trust, observing…

Bombay HC Directs Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust To Pay ₹11.67 Lakh Gratuity To Former Manager

In a ruling on September 1, 2026, the Bombay High Court has dismissed a challenge to an order directing the Breach Candy Swimming Bath Trust to pay its former manager, Rajesh Somnath Nerkar, a gratuity of ₹11.67 lakh. Justice Sandeep Marne also imposed costs of ₹1 lakh on the Trust, citing its failure to utilize available legal avenues and bypassing the statutory remedy.

Nerkar, who served the Trust from November 2000 to July 2, 2023, was terminated after allegedly destroying original membership records during a digitization exercise. The Trust argued that his actions resulted in a loss of ₹5 crore and sought to forfeit his gratuity. However, the court held that the City Civil Court had ruled his termination illegal, although appeals against that decision are pending.

The Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act directed the Trust to pay Nerkar the gratuity, along with 10% interest, in November 2025. The Trust contested the order, claiming they had not been properly served with notices in the gratuity proceedings. However, Justice Marne rejected this objection, stating that the notices had indeed been served through the Trust's Administrative Manager.

The court noted that the Trust had failed to challenge the gratuity order within the statutory period and had "consciously not availed multiple opportunities" provided by the law. The court emphasized that the legislative intent was not to allow an errant employer to hold onto an employee for an extended period through lengthy litigation.

Upon examining the merits of the case, the court found no reason to deny Nerkar the gratuity. They noted that the Trust had not issued the mandatory notice required for the forfeiture of gratuity and that the statutory requirements for its payment had been met. The petition was dismissed, with the court ordering the Trust to pay the dues and costs within six weeks.

Written by urgent.news from Free Press Journal's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.

Read the original at freepressjournal.in →

More in Tech

More from Wednesday 2 September →