Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Parvez Shaikh, was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 07.07.1983 and confirmed on 06.07.1985. In 1989, criminal offences under Sections 465, 468, and 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code were registered against him. He was convicted, and consequently, respondent No. 6 (the management) terminated his services. The petitioner sought gratuity for his service of more than ten years. The respondents opposed the claim, arguing that termination for an offence involving moral turpitude disentitles the petitioner to gratuity. The court considered Section 4(6) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972, and noted that the Act does not contain any provision barring gratuity upon termination for misconduct. The court distinguished Rule 45 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, stating it applies only to pensionary benefits, not gratuity under the Act. The court held that gratuity is a statutory right and not a bounty, and the petitioner is entitled to it. The court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to pay gratuity within three months.
Headnote
A) Payment of Gratuity - Entitlement despite dismissal - Section 4(6) Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - The petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, was convicted for offences under Sections 465, 468, 120B r/w 34 IPC and his services were terminated. He claimed gratuity for over 10 years of service. The court held that gratuity is a statutory right and not a charity; Section 4(6) of the Act does not disentitle an employee from gratuity merely because of termination for misconduct involving moral turpitude. The court directed payment of gratuity within three months. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether an employee whose services are terminated for an offence involving moral turpitude is entitled to gratuity under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to pay gratuity to the petitioner within three months.
Law Points
- Gratuity is a statutory right under Payment of Gratuity Act
- 1972
- not a bounty
- Section 4(6) of the Act does not disentitle an employee dismissed for misconduct involving moral turpitude
- Rule 45 of Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules does not apply to gratuity under the Act
- Termination for misconduct does not automatically forfeit gratuity unless the Act so provides.
