IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2010 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 26660 of 2008(W) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. A.RAGHAVAN (RETIRED ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.) RISHIKESH, GANDHI NAGAR, CHEROOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. P.V.HARIDASAN, (RETIRED PROJECT ENGINEER, KLDC LTD.), PATTATHUVALAPPIL HOUSE, KANDASSANKADAVU P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADVS. SRI.N.P.SAMUEL, SRI.B.K.PURUSHOTHAMAN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA LAND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEAR RAMANILAYAM, CHEMBUKVU, THRISSUR-20. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.N.MOHANAN R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.SANILKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.26660/2008 W APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF ORDER G.O.(MS) NO.230/84/AD DTD. 4/08/1984 ISSUED BY R2. P1(A): COPY OF RULES OF THE R1 CORPORATION. P2: COPY OF ORDER NO.KLDC/AD2/GRATUIT/07 DTD. 23/06/07 ISSUED BY R1. P3: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE R1 ON 6/06/08. P4: COPY OF LETTER NO.KLDC/AD2/GRATUITY/07 DTD. 10/08/07 ISSUED R1 TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. P5: COPY OF LETTER NO.KLDC/AD2/GRATUITY/07 DTD. 21/05/08 ISSUED BY R2 TO 2ND PETITIONER. P6: COPY OF ORDER NO.KLDC/AD2/GRATUITY/06 DTD. 11/01/06 ISSUED BY R1 TO 2ND PETITIONER. P7: COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE R1 DTD. 1/04/2008. P8: COPY OF ORDER NO.6392/A1/94 DTD/ 02/08 (DTE NIL) ISSUED BY KSDC FOR SCs/STs LTD. P9: COPY OF ORDER NO.7619/A1/95 DTD. 6/04/2009 ISSUED BY KSDC FOR SCs & ST LTD. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBIT: R1(A): COPY OF THE GRATUITY RULES. /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 26660 of 2008-W - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of October, 2010. JUDGMENT The only dispute herein is with regard to the gratuity payable to the petitioners. Both the petitioners have retired from the service of the first respondent Corporation. The first petitioner retired as Accounts Officer on 31.5.2007 and the second petitioner retired on superannuation as Project Engineer on 30.11.2005. The Corporation has framed rules, viz. “The Kerala Land Development Corporation Limited Employees Gratuity Rules, 1984. The formula for computation is prescribed under Rule 4(b) of the above Rules and therefore it is pointed out that the maximum gratuity allowable is Rs.3.50 lakhs. As per Ext.P2, the first petitioner was sanctioned an amount of Rs.2.80 lakhs and he filed Ext.P3 representation seeking to sanction and release the balance amount of Rs.70,000/-. Ext.P4 is the reply given by the first respondent to the first petitioner stating that the matter is placed before the Board meeting for consideration. It was also informed by Ext.P5 that the matter is pending before the Government. The second petitioner was also sanctioned an amount of Rs.2.80 lakhs as evident form Ext.P6 and Ext.P7 is the representation given by him. wpc 26660/2008 2 2. The petitioners contended that in the light of the provisions contained in the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 the ceiling limit regarding the payment of gratuity is Rs.3.50 lakhs and the action taken by the respondents limiting it to Rs.2.80 lakhs is illegal. 3. The Corporation has filed a counter affidavit. It is stated in para 4 that the gratuity payable to the employees are governed by the Sub Rules framed by the Corporation and a copy of the same has been produced as Ext.R1(a) (same as Ext.P1). It is further averred in the said para that normally the revision of pay and allowances of the employees of the Corporation are done in tune with the pay revision orders issued for the State Government employees and as per G.O.(P) No.3000/98/Fin dated 25.11.2008 the maximum limit of gratuity applicable to the employees sanctioned is Rs.2.80 lakhs. The stand taken is that the Corporation, even though placed the matter before the Government, there was no direction to pay the gratuity more than Rs.2.80 lakhs. 4. In the reply affidavit the petitioners have pointed out that the Government also has revised the gratuity and has fixed the amount at Rs.3.50 lakhs as per G.O.(P) No.145/2006/Fin. Dated 25.3.2006 which is effective from 1.4.2005. It is therefore submitted by even going by the said Govt. order also, the petitioners are entitled for a higher amount as gratuity. wpc 26660/2008 3 5. The contention raised by the Government is that the Corporation is a loss making unit and therefore the petitioners are not being given the maximum limit of gratuity and the proposal has been deferred. Evidently, Ext.P1 rules has been framed subject to the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. I that view of the matter, evidently the said Act applies to the petitioners. Section 4(3) of the Act was amended to provide the amount of gratuity at Rs.3.50 lakhs, as per the Amendment Act 11 of 1998. Therefore, the gratuity payable to the petitioners will have to be calculated as per the method provided in the Payment of Gratuity Act and Rules and the first petitioner is entitled for payment of Rs.3.5 lakhs which is the maximum and the second petitioner will be entitled to Rs.3.25 lakhs. 6. The pay revision order which was implemented in 2006 also, provides for payment of gratuity at Rs.3.50 lakhs which is the maximum. In that view of the matter also, the petitioners are entitled for payment of gratuity at Rs.3.50 lakhs and Rs.3.25 lakhs respectively. The reasons stated that since the Corporation is a loss making unit, the petitioners are not entitled for such amount, cannot therefore be justified. 7. As far as the first petitioner is concerned, going by the method provided under the relevant rules, the amount payable will be more than Rs.3.50 lakhs. Therefore, the same is limited to Rs.3.50 lakhs and he will wpc 26660/2008 4 be entitled for the balance amount of Rs.70,000/-. As far as the second petitioner is concerned, the total amount payable to him will be Rs.3.25 lakhs and as already an amount of Rs.2.80 lakhs was disbursed to him, the balance amount will be disbursed. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the first respondent to disburse the balance amounts due to the petitioners within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/