IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2010 / 10TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 6891 of 2010(J) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. D.OMANAMMA, D/O.L.DEVAKI AMMA, AGED 65 YEARS, SREEMOOLAM, VIDYANAGAR, KADAVANTHRA. 2. P.T.METILDA, W/O.PETER, AGED 64 YEARS, THIRUTHOODA HOUSE, KATAKKARA CROSS ROAD, KALOOR,KOCHI. 3. T.A.PETER AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.ANTHAPPAN, THIRUTHOODA HOUSE, KATAKKARA CROSS ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI. 4. KRISHNAKARANAVAR, KRISHNA NILAYAM, PULIYOOR, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT(DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, ERNAKULAM) 3. REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM, 4. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LABOUR AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.6891 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners are former employees of the Kerala State Electricity Board who have retired from service on attaining superannuation. They filed applications before the second respondent for getting their gratuity in terms of the Payment of Gratuity Act, which was allowed by Exts.P1 and P2 orders. However, they complain that the balance gratuity has not been paid to them till date. Therefore, they claim appropriate directions for payment of the balance gratuity that is due. 2. As per the directions of the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No.439/2009, the direction was that such balance amount of gratuity should be disbursed to persons like the petitioners on their producing serving employees to execute bonds as security for such payments. However, the said direction has been modified as per order in Review Petition No.440 of 2009 and connected cases as per order dated 15th March 2010. Accordingly, the Division Bench has passed the following directions: “Regarding furnishing of security for the release of DCRG, it is ordered that the Board wpc No.6891/2010 2 need not insist for the execution of bonds by two serving employees. If security to the satisfaction of the concerned Controlling Officers is furnished or bank guarantee is furnished, the amount shall be released to the review petitioners and other similarly placed employees”. 3. In view of the above modified direction, the petitioners are entitled to payment of the balance amount of gratuity due and payable to them on their furnishing sufficient security to the satisfaction of the Controlling Officer concerned. 4. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to deposit the balance amount of gratuity due and payable to the petitioners within a period of six weeks and to disburse the said amounts to the petitioners on their furnishing sufficient security to the satisfaction of the Controlling Officer by producing suitable sureties or on the security of bonds executed by two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the Controlling Officer. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/