IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 WA.No. 55 of 2007(A) -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.28421/2006 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER IN THE WP ---------------------------------- R.ANANTHAKUMAR, MANAGING PARTNER, SEEMATTI TALKIES, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.PREMCHAND R NAIR. RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS IN THE WP ------------------------------------ 1. A.P.MONEY, NADAKKAL PARAMBIL, ZILLA COURT WARD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT 1972, DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.AZAD BABU FOR R1 H2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 1173 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & V.K.MOHANAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------- W.A. No. 55 OF 2007 & WPC NO.1173 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated, the 10th day of November , 2009 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. The question raised in the connected writ appeal and writ petition is one and the same, that is, whether the contesting respondents are entitled to claim gratuity from appellant-petitioner. 2. The claimants were employees of the theatre owned by the appellant. However, they were found to be engaged in permitting entry of people in the theatre without tickets which lead to loss to the management and the same led to their dismissal. The Industrial Tribunal, however, ordered reinstatement and payment of compensation at the rate of Rs.15,000/- each together with full back wages. When the Industrial WA No.55 of 2007 -:2:- Tribunal award was questioned before this Court by both the parties, this Court allowed the parties to settle the dispute on payment of compensation at the rate of Rs.40,000/- each besides Rs.15,000/- already paid to them during the pendency of the case. It is seen from Ext.P3 that besides compensation amount, this Court also ordered payment of Provident fund to the claimants. It is specifically stated in Ext.P3 judgment that the entire liability of the management towards the workmen will stand settled on payment in terms of the judgment. The judgment was pronounced on 8.8.2002 and the payment under the same was to be made within one month from the date of judgment. However, after several years, the claimants have chosen to file application for gratuity which was allowed by the authority under the Act. It is against these orders, the above writ appeal and writ petition are filed. 3. After hearing both sides and after going through Ext.P3 judgment, we are of the view that the claimants have no authority to claim any amount from the WA No.55 of 2007 -:3:- management because it is clearly stated in the judgment that the compensation fixed was towards the discharge of entire liability of the management to the workmen. It is not as if the Single Judge was unaware of the workers' claims towards gratuity particularly when provident fund is separately dealt with in the judgment. So much so, in our view, the claim for gratuity is absolutely untenable against the management. We therefore, allow the writ appeal by vacating the judgment of the learned Single Judge and allow the writ petition by vacating the order passed by the authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act directing payment of gratuity to the first respondent in both the above cases. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE kvm/- WA No.55 of 2007 -:4:- V.K.MOHANAN, J. O.P.No. JUDGMENT Dated:..