IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 4TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5794 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. K.K.GIRIJA, AGED 66 YEARS, KAIPPILLIL HOUSE, EAST KADUNGALLOOR, ALUVA-2. 2. K.AMBIKAKUMARI, AGED 60 YEARS, AMBIKASADAN, MENON PARAMBU ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. BY ADV. SRI.K.K.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT (DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, ERNAKULAM). 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR AND REHABILITATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GP K C SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.5794 OF 2010 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 23rd DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioners are retired employees of the KSEB. They have filed gratuity case Nos.64 of 2006 and 81 of 2006 for getting the balance gratuity due under the Payment of Gratuity Act before the second respondent. Their claims were rejected by the second respondent, relying on Ext.P2 Government order. According to the petitioners, Ext.P2 Government order was subsequently withdrawn by Ext.P3. Therefore, they filed petitions for review of the orders rejecting their claims. The petitioners contend that the said petitions are pending without any orders being passed thereon. The petitioners rely on Ext.P7 judgment by which this court has directed restoration of gratuity cases filed by similarly situated persons and directed the matters to be heard and disposed of in accordance with law. 2. Adv.K.C.Santhosh Kumar, the learned Senior Government Pleader, who appears for the second respondent, fairly concedes that in view of Ext.P3 notification whereby Ext.P2 notification exempting the Wpc 5794/2010 2 KSEB from the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 has been cancelled, the second respondent should necessarily review its earlier order rejecting the gratuity cases filed by the petitioners. In view of the above submission, I feel that this writ petition itself can be disposed of with the following directions. 3. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with the following directions. i)The order passed by the second respondent dated 5.2.2008 rejecting gratuity case Nos.64 of 2006 and 81 of 2006 shall stand set aside and the said cases shall stand restored to file. ii)The second respondent is directed to issue fresh notice to the petitioners as well as the other parties in the cases and to dispose of the said cases on the merits, after affording the KSEB as well as the other parties, a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The orders as indicated above shall be passed expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk