IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 37533 of 2009(J) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- A.DAMODHARAN, PUTHUMANA HOUSE, PUTHIYAVILA.P.O. BY ADV. MR.R.GOPAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETRY, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KARTHIKAPPALLY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK NO.A 326, HARIPAD.P.O, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, KOTTAYAM. R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR, SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR). R3 BY ADV. SMT.PRABHA R.MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2010 ALONG WITH 183 OF 2010 AND WPC.NO.205 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.37533/2009 J APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD. 20/03/2009. P2: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 7/05/2009 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NOS: 37533/2009, 183 & 205 OF 2010 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th March, 2010. JUDGMENT These writ petitions are disposed of together for the reason that the contentions raised therein are identical. 2. The petitioners are employees of the first respondent Co- operative Bank. They have retired from service on attaining superannuation after completing long periods of service. For effecting payment of gratuity under the Gratuity Act, the first respondent-bank has constituted a group gratuity cash accumulation scheme with the help of the second respondent Life Insurance Corporation of India constituting a gratuity fund trust. The complaint of the petitioners in both the writ petitions is that the entire amount of gratuity due to them calculated on the basis of fifteen days pay for every completed year of service has not been paid to them. Instead, their gratuity has been limited to an amount of Rs.3,50,000/-. The counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of this Court in Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co- operative Bank Ltd. (2005(3)KLT 320) as well as the decision of this court in W.P(C) 17842/2009. As per the dictum laid down in WPC 37533/09,183/10 & 205/10 2 the decisions referred to above, the petitioners claim the full amount of gratuity due to them calculated on length of their service. It cannot be disputed that the petitioners are entitled to payment of gratuity in accordance with the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act. On such calculation, if the amount due is more than what is provided for under the scheme, it is certainly the liability of the employer to pay the balance amount due to the employees. In the present cases the claim of the petitioner in W.P (C) 37533/2009 is for an amount of Rs.4,61,394/-, the claim of the petitioner in W.P(C) 183/2010 is for an amount of Rs.5,60,745/- and the claim of the petitioner in W.P(C)205/2010 is for an amount of Rs.6,47,261/-. Therefore in the present cases the petitioners are entitled to get the balance amount of gratuity payable to them, in excess of the amount of Rs.3,50,000/- already paid provided the calculation made by them is correct and admissible in accordance with the provisions of the Gratuity Act. In view of the above these writ petitions are disposed of directing the first respondent to compute the amount of gratuity due to the petitioners in these writ petitions in accordance with the provisions of the Gratuity Act and to pay to them the entire amount due as gratuity less the amount WPC 37533/09,183/10 & 205/10 3 that has been already paid. K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 37533/09,183/10 & 205/10 4