IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 5TH OCTOBER 2010 / 13TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 30524 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER : ------------------ C.SAROJINI, AGED 67 YEARS W/O. P.S.SUBRAMANIAN, 8/345, MUDAKKOD, PIRVISALA, CHANDRA NAGAR P.O., PALAGHAT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB ABRAHAM SMT.KOCHUMOL KODUVATH RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT, 1972 ( DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER KOZHIKODE), CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE - 673 001 3. APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE GRATUITY ACT, 1972 AND REGIONAL LABOUR OFFICER COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE - 673 001 R1 BY ADV. SRI. K.S. ANIL, SC R2 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.30524 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 5th October, 2010 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner, who is a retired employee of the Kerala State Electricity Board, is pertaining to the non-disbursement of gratuity payable to him under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. As per the order passed in G.C.No.307/2004, the second respondent found that the petitioner is entitled to get the balance of gratuity amount. The same was challenged by the first respondent before the third respondent in appeal. However, the third respondent dismissed the appeal, as is obvious from Ext.P3 order. At the time of filing of the said appeal, the first respondent had deposited the arrears of gratuity payable to the petitioner before the third respondent. Despite the dismissal of the appeal, no action was taken by the third respondent to disburse the gratuity amount already deposited by the first respondent. It is raising grievance against the action on the part of the second and third respondents in not disbursing the arrears of gratuity that this writ petition has been filed. 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 WP(C).No.30524/2010 2 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 petitioner on his executing a bond for the equivalent amount to be disbursed to him. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS