Gratuity cannot be forfeited for act involving moral turpitude unless convicted by a court - Supreme Court

Interpreting Section 4(6)(b)(ii) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the Supreme Court in its order dated 14.8.2018 (copy attached) has held that forfeiture of gratuity on the ground of misconduct which constitutes an offence involving moral turpitude, is permissible only if he is convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction for the said offence.
The bench of Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul (in Union Bank of India vs. CG Ajay Babu) also observed that forfeiture of gratuity is not automatic on dismissal from service; but it is subject to sub-Sections (5) and (6) of Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972.
Thanks

The Union agreement about Gratuity has saved the person.

Kudos! We Kritarth Team Learn true-blue meaning of Being Up- to-Date- aVirtue of Learned Scholar.
Happy Indendence Day
Kritarth Team
15.8.18

Dear PCA Sir,
With due respect to you and to your chair.
EPFO Circular No. Pension - 1 / 12 / 33 / EPS Amendment / 96 / Vol II / 34007 dated 23.03.2017 of the EPFO Head Office in pursuance of the Honorable Supreme Court Order in SLP No. 33032 - 33033 of 2015 dated 04.10.2016.
Settlement of pension cases in respect of eligible members in light of the Supreme Court order dated 04.10.2016.
The said Apex Court ruling is applicable.
1 PF Unexempted Entity OR Exempted Entity.
2 EPS 52 OR EPS 95 OR Both Scheme if pension falls partly under 52 Scheme and partly under 95 Scheme.
A line in reply is appreciated.
Regards,

Thanks Mr Agrawal for sharing the information
In most of time many people asked to this forum, whether he is eligible for Gratuity as rendered 4 years and 6,7,8&9....... months.
Here in this order of the Supreme Court clearly mentioned in point No 9 that ; " rendered conteneous services not less than FIVE Years".

Dear Prabhat,
Gratuity is payable on continuous service of 5 years, Contiguous service means 240 days in year . 4 years and 240 days is eligible for grauity. Honorable supreme court does not comment of existing law. they just interpreted it.
Regards
Sandeep