IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31397 of 2009(T) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.P.MADHAVAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (RTD.) KERALA STTE ELECTRICITY BOARD, POORANIMA,P.O. EACHUR KANNUR - 670591. 2. K.C.KALLIANIKUTTY, ASSISTANT ACCOUNT OFFICER (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, 'DHANUSH' KEECHERIKUNNU, P.O.PAPPINISSERY, KANNUR. 3. KUSALAN A.K., ASSISTANT ENGINEER (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, 'SHANTHI' CHERUMAVILAYIL, P.O. MAVILAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT. 4. M.VALSAN, SUB ENGINEER (RTD) 'VIASAKH' VALIAPARAMBA,KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, P.O., AZHIKODE, KANNUR 600009. 5. K.C. BHASKARAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER(RTD), KERALA STATE ELECTICITY BOARD, KEY CEE HOUSE, ARIMBRA, MULLAKODI P.O. 6. V.RAVEENDRAN, SENIOR ASSISTANT (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, "MIDHULA" P.O. MAMBALAM, PINARAYI, KANNUR DISTRICT 7. M.SUBHAKARAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (RTD) KERALA STAE ELECTRICITY BOARD, 'AISWARYA' KANAL ROAD, P.O. KAKKAD, KANNUR 8. K.M.GOPALAN, ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD RAMANAND NEAR KALLADATHODE, P.O. ALAVIL, KANNUR. 9. M.KUNHAPPA SUPERINTENDENT (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, "KAVITHA" CHELORA, P.O. VARAM, KANNUR DISTRICT 670009 10. P.RAMACHANDRAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICTY BOARD, 'SWARA RAG', NEAR KAPPUMKARA, P.O.AZHEEKODE SOUTH. WP(C).No. 31397 of 2009(T) -2- 11. K.K.SADANANDAN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BAORD, "SUSHASREE" NEAR GOVT.POLY TECHNIC, P.O.THOTTADA, KANNUR -07. 12. M.C.RASHEED LINE MAN GRADE I (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, JUDHI C.K. 185,ANJARAKKANDY ROAD, KANNUR -17. 13. K.C.PAVITHRAN, SUB ENGINEER (RTD) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BAORD, "PAVITHRAM" KIZHUTHALLY, THAZHE CHOVVA P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT.670018. BY ADV. MR.P.M.PAREETH MR.MOHAMMED SHAMEEL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE. 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, KANNUR. 3. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VIDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.S.MOHAMMED HASHIM ADV. MR. K.S.ANIL, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 31397 of 2009(T) APPENDIX PETITIONERS'EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 - TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.9.2006. EXT.P2 - THE DETAILS OF THE BALANCE AMOUNT OF GRATUITY PAYABLE TO THE PETITIONERS AS ORDERED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 - TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.8.2009 IN WP(C) NO. 18510/09 AND CONNECTED CASES. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE rhs S. SIRI JAGAN, J ............................................... W.P(C) No. 31397 of 2009 ................................................. Dated this the 20th day of November, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioners in this writ petition are retired employees of the KSEB. They were paid gratuity as per KSR which was adopted by the KSEB. The petitioners approached the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act seeking a direction to the Board to disburse the balance gratuity due to them as per the Payment of Gratuity Act, which was allowed by the Controlling Authority by Ext.P1 order. The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the KSEB to pay to the petitioners the balance gratuity as ordered by the Controlling Authority. 2. The learned standing counsel for the KSEB would contend that the decision of the Division Bench based on which the impugned orders have been passed, has been taken in appeal before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has already stayed the operation of that judgment. Therefore, according to the Standing Counsel, the amounts should not be directed to be disbursed to the petitioners until the Supreme Court finally W.P(C) No. 31397 of 2009 -2- decides the matter, although amounts have been deposited with the authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act. 3. I have heard both sides. 4. This Court has in, the decision in Abdul Rehiman v. District Collector, Malappuram [2009 (4) KHC 283], held that even when a decision of the Division Bench is stayed by the Supreme Court, the learned Single Judges of this Court are bound by the law declared by the Division Bench, until the same has been set aside by the Supreme Court. That being so, in this case, although the Division Bench judgment has been stayed by the Supreme Court, the petitioners in this case are entitled to the benefit of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court. But another Division Bench has issued certain directions to safeguard the interest of the Board in the event of the Board ultimately succeeding before the Supreme Court, which are to be followed in this case also. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: If, within four months, the Board is not able to get the appeal pending before the Supreme Court disposed of, the W.P(C) No. 31397 of 2009 -3- gratuity amounts deposited shall be disbursed to the petitioners on the petitioners furnishing bonds with two serving employees of the Board as sureties for due repayment of the amounts so disbursed, if ultimately the Supreme Court decides the cases in favour of the Board. If the petitioners are not able to find two serving employees of the Board as sureties, the amounts need be disbursed only after disposal of the appeal pending before the Supreme Court. But in that event, the Board would be liable pay further interest at the rate of 10% on the amounts so due. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE rhs