Supreme Court Rules Resignation Forfeits Pension, but Upholds Statutory Right to Gratuity

HomeOther LawsSupreme Court Rules Resignation Forfeits Pension, but Upholds Statutory Right to Gratuity

Supreme Court Rules Resignation Forfeits Pension, but Upholds Statutory Right to Gratuity

Other Laws

Published on

10/01/2026

By Amit Sharma

Supreme Court Rules Resignation Forfeits Pension, but Upholds Statutory Right to Gratuity

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Supreme Court of India has ruled that an employee who resigns from service forfeits all past service for the purpose of pensionary benefits. However, the Court simultaneously held that such a forfeiture does not strip an employee of their statutory right to gratuity or leave encashment. The case involved a conductor who joined the…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

Amit Sharma

Amit Sharma is the Content Editor at JurisHour. He has been writing about the Indian legal market. He has covered tax & company litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and Various Tribunals. Amit graduated from MLSU Law College with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. from MLSU, Udaipur, Rajasthan. An Advocate in Taxation, and practised in Tribunals as well as Rajasthan High Court and pursued Masters in Constitutional Law. He started out small with little resources but a big plan to take tax legal education to the remotest locations across India and eventually to the world. His vision is to make tax related legal developments accessible to the masses.

Supreme Court Rules Resignation Forfeits Pension, but Upholds Statutory Right to Gratuity

Membership Required

Latest articles

Uncorroborated Co-Accused Statement Can’t Sustain Penal Action Against Importer: CESTAT

Customs Duty Exemption Can’t Be Denied Without Test Report to Support Reclassification: CESTAT

Stock Discrepancy Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Removal: CESTAT

Exporters Entitled to Service Tax Refund Despite Later Inclusion of CHA Services in Refund Scheme: CESTAT

More like this

Uncorroborated Co-Accused Statement Can’t Sustain Penal Action Against Importer: CESTAT

Customs Duty Exemption Can’t Be Denied Without Test Report to Support Reclassification: CESTAT

Stock Discrepancy Alone Can’t Prove Clandestine Removal: CESTAT

About us

Company

Categories