IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 19567 of 2009(M) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ THE SUPERINTENDENT, VENGATHANAM ESTATE, OORAKKANADU.P.O., PARATHODU, KANJIRAPPALLY. BY ADVS. MR.E.K.NANDAKUMAR, MR.A.K.JAYASANKAR NAMBIAR, MR.K.JOHN MATHAI, MR.P.BENNY THOMAS, MR.ANIL D. NAIR. RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------------- 1. SRI. K.NANOO, PUTHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VENGATHANAM ESTATE,OORKAKKANADU.P.O., PARATHODU, KANJIRAPPALLY. 2. THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 (DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER) KOTTAYAM. 3. THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 (REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER) KAKKANAD. R1 BY ADV. MR.THAMPAN THOMAS THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.19567/2009 M APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE ORDER IN G.C.NO.9/2000 DTD. 07/02/2008 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM DTD. 02/04/2001 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. P3: COPY OF THE ODER IN G.A.NO.1/2008 DTD. 21/04/2009 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE CHALLAN DTD. 20/03/2001 EVIDENCING REMITTANCE OF RS.40,632/-. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: R1(A): COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 8/11/2009. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 19567 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th March, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P1 order in Gratuity Case No:9/2000. The first respondent was a worker under the petitioner who complained that he had not been paid his gratuity. There was no dispute regarding the length of his service and other particulars mentioned by him. According to the petitioner, the gratuity of the first respondent was not paid for the reason that he had not vacated the line room that was allotted to him for residence, even after his retirement. The stand of the management did not find favour with the authorities and it has been held that the amount of gratuity cannot be withheld for not vacating the quarters allotted to the employee. Therefore, it was held that the workman was entitled to receive his gratuity which has been quantified at an amount of Rs.40,632/- with simple interest thereon at 10% per annum with effect from 23/3/2000. It is submitted that the said amount has been deposited by the management before the Appellate Authority and that the same is remaining in deposit. The first respondent has filed counter affidavit producing Ext.R1(a) communication issued by the WPC 19567/2009 2 management informing the District Labour Officer that the workman had vacated the quarters occupied by him. Therefore, the management has informed that they have no objection in the gratuity amount that has been deposited being paid to the workman. In view of Ext.R1(a) it is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that appropriate directions could be issued for disbursing the gratuity amount to the first respondent as directed by the Appellate Authority. 2. In the above circumstances this writ petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to disburse the amount of gratuity due and payable to the first respondent in terms of Exts.P1 and P3 proceedings, on the first respondent approaching the Appellate Authority for payment of the said amount. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 19567/2009 3 K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: