---

---

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that an employee’s act of seeking another job—even with a rival company—is a basic right and does not amount to “moral turpitude” under employment law. Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), addressing a gratuity dispute, dismissed a company’s claims that the employee’s conduct justified forfeiture of his dues.

The case involved M/s. Xpro India Limited, which accused its ex-technician of holding meetings with a competitor and passing confidential manufacturing information. After a domestic inquiry, the employee’s services were terminated and gratuity withheld citing misconduct and moral turpitude. However, the company could not furnish witness evidence or call records to substantiate these charges.

Justice Dutt emphasized that simply pursuing alternative employment for better perks or conditions—even with a rival—is not dishonest, immoral, or unlawful. Mere job hunting does not justify forfeiting statutory rights like gratuity unless misconduct amounting to an offence involving moral turpitude is proven through lawful proceedings. The Court found the inquiry to be abusive and lacking proper findings, and ordered the company to pay the full gratuity plus interest within two months.

This decision reaffirms employee mobility as a fundamental right and stresses that disciplinary measures must adhere to principles of natural justice, with substantial proof before forfeiting legally protected benefits.