IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9876 of 2010(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ P.M.IBRAHIM, AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.MARKKAR, KUNNATH HOUSE, WEST VELIYATHUNADU, ALANGADU.P.O, ALUVA. BY ADV. MR.K.K.RAJEEV RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY ACT (DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, ERNAKULAM). 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR AND REHABILITATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY ADV. MR. K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB R2 & R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.C. SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.9876 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a retired employee of the Kerala State Electricity Board. He had filed Gratuity Case No.85 of 2006 for getting the balance gratuity payable to him under the Payment of Gratuity Act. However, the second respondent, after trial rejected the claim of the petitioner relying on Ext.P2 Government Order. It is submitted that, the said Government order has subsequently been withdrawn by Ext.P3. Therefore, in similar matters, this Court has quashed the orders passed by the second respondent. Such matters have been remitted to the second respondent for consideration afresh. One such judgment is Ext.P7. The petitioner is also entitled to a similar order in this case. 2. In the above circumstances, this Writ Petition is allowed and the following directions are issued:- i) The order passed by the second respondent in Gratuity Case No.85/2006 shall stand set aside and the case shall stand restored to file. wpc No.9876/2010 2 ii) The second respondent is directed to issue fresh notice to the petitioner as well as the other parties in the case and to dispose of the same on the merits, after affording the KSEB as well as the other parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The orders as directed above shall be passed expeditiously and at any rate within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE css/