IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 6608 of 2008(J) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------ 1. P.B.BABUJI, S/O. K.P.BHANU, AGED 61 YEARS, BHANUVILASOM BUNGLOW, UPPOODU, EAST KALLADA. 2. SIVAN N.I., AGED 60 YEARS, KAILAS, UMAYANALLOOR P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THAZHUTHALA VILLAGE OFFICE, UMAYANALLOOR, KOLLAM. 4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, QUETCOS LIMITED, UMAYANALLOOR, KOLLAM. 5. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR - R4 SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR - R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH - R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.6608/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER IN G.C. NO.160/05 DT. 12.8.05 BY THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER KOLLAM. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE ORDER IN G.C. NO.202/05 DT. 21.1.2006. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DT. 20.11.07. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DT. 5.12.2007. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss S.SIRI JAGAN, J = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No. 6608 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioners have obtained orders against the 4th respondent from the authorities under the Payment of Gratuity Act, for payment of gratuity. The grievance of the petitioners in this writ petition is that respondents 2 and 3 are not taking appropriate action for recovery of the amounts due in spite of the requisition from the 5th respondent. 2. I have heard the parties. 3. Learned Government Pleader would submit that the 4th respondent has informed them that they are awaiting funds from the Government and only after receiving those funds they can pay the petitioners. This is repeated by the counsel for the 4th respondent also. But it is not disputed before me that the 4th respondent has assets which can be proceeded against. That being so, the respondents 2 and 3 are bound to proceed further for recovery of amounts due from the 4th respondent to the petitioners under the Payment of Gratuity Act. In that view, W.P.(C).No. 6608 OF 2008 2 there would be a direction to the respondents 2 and 3 to see that the amounts are collected from the 4th respondent and paid to the petitioners, if necessary by coercive proceedings against the assets of the 4th respondent, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE bkn/-