IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2011 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 36925 of 2010(M) ------------------------ PETITIONER : --------------------- P.E.SARAMMA, W/O.T.I.KURIAN, THEKKETHIL HOUSE, VALLAMKULAM EAST, THIRUVALLA (BRANCH MANAGER (RETIRED), ERAVIPEROOR BRANCH OF THIRUVALLA EAST CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.NO.3260). BY ADVS. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND SRI.T.NIKLAVU RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. 2. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM– 695 001. 3. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, PATHANAMTHITTA– 689 001. 4. THE THIRUVALLA EAST CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.3260, H.O. ERAVIPEROOR REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER– 689 542. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/05/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 9014/2011 & WPC NO. 37156/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 36925 of 2010(M) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE SCHEDULE TO THE LIC MASTER POLICY. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24/1/2008 IN WPC NO. 8598/2007 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30/5/2008 IN WPC NO. 16169/2008 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15/11/2010 SUBMITTED BEFORE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) Nos. 36925, 37156 OF 2010 & 9014 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are former employees of the Thiruvalla East Co- operative Bank Ltd. No.3260 (hereinafter referred to as 'the bank' for short). They have filed these writ petitions contending that though under the Employees Group Gratuity Life Assurance Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'the scheme' for short) they were entitled to receive more than Rs.3.50 lakhs by way of gratuity, the fourth respondent bank paid them only Rs.3.50 lakhs on their retirement. In these writ petitions they seek a direction to the fourth respondent bank to disburse the balance amount of gratuity payable to them under the scheme, relying on the decision of this Court in Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. (2005 (3) KLT 320) and the unreported decisions of this Court in W.P.(C) Nos.5351 & 5873 of 2010 relating to the bank itself. 2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 36925 of 2010 retired from service on 31.1.2007 while she was working as Branch Manager of the Eraviperoor branch of the bank. Upon retirement, she was paid the sum of Rs.3.50 lakhs by way of gratuity. Relying on the provisions of the scheme and the decision of this Court in Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. (supra) the petitioner contends that she was entitled to receive the sum of Rs.5,88,963/- by way of gratuity and seeks WPC No.36925/2010 & Conn. Cases 2 payment of the balance amount of Rs.2,38,963/- from the fourth respondent bank. 3. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 37156 of 2010 retired from service on 31.3.2010 while he was working as Branch Manager of the Eraviperoor branch of the bank. Upon retirement, he was paid the sum of Rs.3.50 lakhs by way of gratuity. Relying on the provisions of the scheme and the decision of this Court in Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. (supra) the petitioner contends that he was entitled to receive the sum of Rs.9,52,996/- by way of gratuity and seeks payment of the balance amount of Rs.6,02,996 /- from the fourth respondent bank. 4. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 9014 of 2011 retired from service on 20.9.2009 while he was working as General Manager in charge of the bank. Upon retirement, he was paid the sum of Rs.3.50 lakhs by way of gratuity. Relying on the provisions of the scheme and the decision of this Court in Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. (supra) the petitioner contends that he was entitled to receive the sum of Rs.6,55,410/- by way of gratuity and seeks payment of the balance amount of Rs.3,05,410/- from the fourth respondent bank. 5. Heard Sri.S.Subhash Chand, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.P.Haridas, learned standing counsel appearing for the fourth respondent bank. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners WPC No.36925/2010 & Conn. Cases 3 submitted that under the scheme the petitioners were entitled to receive gratuity in excess of Rs.3.50 lakhs and that their counter parts who were the petitioners in W.P.(C) Nos.5351 & 5873 of 2010 were held entitled to that relief in the light of the decision in Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. (supra) which was approved by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No,1250 of 2004. The learned counsel contended that the petitioners are therefore entitled to receive the balance amount of gratuity which they were entitled to get under the scheme. 6. Though the fourth respondent bank has been served it has not so far disputed the entitlement of the petitioners to receive gratuity in excess of the sum of Rs.3.50 lakhs. In such circumstances in the light of the decision of this Court in Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co-op. Bank Ltd. (supra) which was affirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No,1250 of 2004 and the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court in W.P.(C) Nos.5351 & 5873 of 2010, I dispose of the writ petition with a direction that if under the scheme the petitioners were entitled to receive gratuity in excess of Rs.3.50 lakhs, which has already been paid to them, the fourth respondent bank shall take steps to disburse the balance amount of gratuity expeditiously and in any event within one month from the date on which the petitioners submit an appropriate representation accompanied by a certified copy of this judgment before the General WPC No.36925/2010 & Conn. Cases 4 Manager of the fourth respondent bank. If till date the fourth respondent bank has not so far received payment in excess of Rs.3.50 lakhs from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, it will be open to them to move the Life Insurance Corporation of India seeking such payment, if under the scheme the Life Insurance Corporation of India was liable to pay more than Rs.3.50 lakhs in respect of each of the petitioners. If the petitioners have any other grievance other than payment of gratuity, it will be open to them to move the competent authority seeking redressal of their grievances. Their contentions in that regard are kept open. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps