9911796707
TMI Blog1973 (3) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... May 29, 1965, inside the factory. A departmental enquiry was held wherein, it is said, he was given every opportunity to fully participate. He was found guilty of misconduct by the domestic tribunal and was accordingly dismissed. There was a scheme of gratuity in force, which was and is not challenged by the respondent. Clause 4 of that scheme, which is called "Terms of Agreement", provides that if a dispute arises regarding a claim for payment of gratuity of a workman who has been dismissed for misconduct, such a dispute shall be referred to the labour court having jurisdiction, for decision. As a dispute arose with regard to the payment of gratuity, the matter was referred to the Labour court. Before that court, in the statement of case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt, however, referred to the judgment of this Court in State of Punjab v. Suraj Parkash Kapur, etc. [1962] 2 S.C.R. 711., in which the general argument was not accepted that in all cases where services of an employee are terminated for misconduct, gratuity should not be paid to him. However, this Court has had occasion to consider in detail the various circumstances in which gratuity would be liable to forfeiture for misconduct of a particular nature. It was laid down in Delhi Cloth & General Mills Co., Ltd., v. Workmen and Others, etc. [1969] 2 S.C.R. 307., that the object of having a gratuity scheme is to provide a retiring benefit to workmen who have rendered long and unblemished service to the employer and thereby contributed to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed agreement with the decision in the earlier case that matters which had impact on the discipline and the working of the concern, require a different treatment in the matter of forfeiture of gratuity. It is significant that in S. 4 (6) (b) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, it has been provided as follows : "the gratuity payable to an employee shall be wholly forfeited (i) if the services of such employee have been terminated for his riotous or disorderly conduct or any other act of violence on his part. " Although the provisions of this statute would not govern the decision of the present case, the importance of the enactment lies ill the fact that the principle which was laid down in the Delhi Cloth Mills case with regard to forfeiture ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
