IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 5TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29610 of 2010(A) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. M.T.SUBRAMANIAN, AGED 66, RESNA NIVAS, NALLALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE. 2. M.K.MAYAVATHY, AGED 67 'NAVANEETHAM', EAST HILL P.O., KOZHIKODE. 3. K.SUNDARAN, AGED 61 'THRIPTHI', ERANHIKKAL P.O., KOZHIKODE. 4. PRASANNA MOSES, AGED 60, GODFRED VILLA, NADAKKAVU P.O., KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.S.K.SAJU SRI.A.RANJITH NARAYANAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, REGIONAL JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 3. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.K.C.SANTHOSH FOR R1 AND R2 ADV. MR.K.S.ANIL, SC. KSEB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.29610 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 27th September, 2010 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioners, who are retired employees of the Kerala State Electricity Board, is pertaining to the non-disbursement of gratuity payable to them under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. As per the orders passed in G.C.Nos.419/2004, 98/2006, 169/2005 & 99/2006 the second respondent found that the petitioners are entitled to get the balance of gratuity amount. The same was challenged by the third respondent before the first respondent in appeals. However, the first respondent dismissed the appeals, as is obvious from Ext.P2 series of orders. At the time of filing of the said appeals, the third respondent had deposited the arrears of gratuity payable to the petitioners before the first respondent. Despite the dismissal of the appeals, no action was taken by the first respondent to disburse the gratuity amount already deposited by the third respondent. It is raising grievance against the action on the part of the first and second respondents in not disbursing the arrears of gratuity that this writ petition has been filed. WP(C).No.29610/2010 2 2. In view of the fact that this Court has already passed orders on similar matters directing the concerned respondent to disburse the balance amount of gratuity on execution of a bond for the equivalent amount by the concerned petitioners, this writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to disburse the balance amount of gratuity payable to the petitioners on their executing bonds for the equivalent amounts to be disbursed to them. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge jma //true copy// P.A to Judge