Gratuity Can Be Denied Only When There Is Termination On Account Of Misconduct: SC [Read Judgment]

It is not enough that the alleged misconduct of the employee constitutes an offence involving moral turpitude as per the report of the domestic inquiry, the bench said.The Supreme Court in Jorsingh Govind Vanjari Vs. Divisional Controller Maharashtra, State Road Transport Corporation, has held that in order to deny gratuity to an employee, it is not enough that the alleged misconduct of. It is not enough that the alleged misconduct of the employee constitutes an offence involving moral turpitude as per the report of the domestic inquiry, the bench said. The Supreme Court in Jorsingh Govind Vanjari Vs. Divisional Controller Maharashtra, State Road Transport Corporation, has held that in order to deny gratuity to an employee, it is not enough that the alleged misconduct of the employee constitutes an offence involving moral turpitude as per the report of the domestic inquiry, but there must be termination on account of the alleged misconduct, which constitutes an offence involving moral turpitude. In case, the high court was of the view that termination was justified, it could not have ordered for payment of any compensation.” Holding that the employee shall be entitled to gratuity in respect of his continuous service from his original appointment till the date of his superannuation, the bench observed: “ In order to deny gratuity to an employee, it is not enough that the alleged misconduct of the employee constitutes an offence involving moral turpitude as per the report of the domestic inquiry.