IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD AUGUST 2011 / 12TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21116 of 2011(L) ------------------------ PETITIONER : ---------------------+ THE SECRETARY, QUILON DISTRICT MOTOR TRANSPORT WORKERS' CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD NO.Q 420 (COMOS) RAMANKULANGARA, KOLLAM 691 003. BY ADVS. SRI.P.DEEPAK SMT.APARNA RAJAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY THAHASILDAR REVENUE RECOVERY, KOLLAM. 2. THE CONTROLLING AUTHORITY UNDER THE PAYMENT OF GRATUITY (DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER), KOLLAM - 691 001. 3. N.GOPINATHAN NAIR, THAIKKOTTATHIL VEEDU, KANNIMELCHERRY, KAVANADU PO, KOLLAM- 691 003. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE - 691 001. 5. THE DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, KOLLAM - 691 001. R1, R2, R4 & R5 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. S. ABDUL SALAM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/- WP(C).No. 21116 of 2011(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29/3/09. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.1.2010. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE SHOWCAUSE NOTICE DATED 11.6.2010. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 17.7.2010. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 13.5.2011. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 2/7/11. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS - NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21116 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner who suffered an adverse order on the application filed by the third respondent herein under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 has filed this writ petition challenging the steps taken by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act to recover the amount awarded to the third respondent as gratuity. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- 2. By Ext.P1 order passed on 29.3.2009, on an application filed by the third respondent, a former employee of the society represented by the petitioner, the Controlling Authority directed payment of the sum of Rs.61,225/- as gratuity together with simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date on which the gratuity fell due, viz., 1.7.2003. The employer did not challenge Ext.P1 order by filing an appeal. Instead it filed an application to set aside that order which was passed ex-parte. By Ext.P2 order, that application was dismissed on the ground that it is belated. Even thereafter, the employer did not pay the amount of gratuity directed to be paid by the Controlling Authority. The Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act thereupon issued Ext.P3 show cause W.P.(C) No.21116 of 2011 2 notice dated 11.6.2010. The employer did not even thereafter deposit the amount awarded as gratuity. Instead it submitted Ext.P4 representation dated 17.7.2010 requesting the Controlling Authority for time to make the payment. The Controlling Authority thereupon made a requisition to the revenue authorities to recover the amount of gratuity. Ext.P5 notice was thereupon issued on 13.5.2011 under section 7 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, 1968 demanding payment of the amount of gratuity together with interest. The instant writ petition is filed challenging the revenue recovery proceedings. The main contention raised by the petitioner is that before issuing Ext.P5 notice under the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, the Deputy Tahsildar ought to have awaited the decision of the Controlling Authority on the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P4 representation for time to make the payment. 2. The fact that the third respondent was a former employee of the society represented by the petitioner is not in dispute. The fact that after retirement he was not paid gratuity is also not disputed. The employee thereupon moved the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and by Ext.P1 order dated 29.3.2009, passed after notice to the employer, the said application was allowed. It has become final. The liability of the employer to pay gratuity cannot therefore be disputed. The W.P.(C) No.21116 of 2011 3 petitioner has in Ext.P4 representation stated that non payment of the gratuity was for want of funds. Ext.P4 representation was submitted on 17.7.2010. More than one year has passed thereafter and more than two years have passed after Ext.P1 order was passed. The employee retired from service on 30.6.2003 and more than 8 years have passed thereafter. Such being the situation, it cannot be said that the Deputy Tahsildar acted in haste in issuing the demand notice. I, therefore, find no merit in the challenge to Ext.P5. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. However having regard to the financial difficulty expressed by the employer, I deem it proper to direct that the revenue recovery proceedings shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three months from today, so as to enable the petitioner to deposit the entire amount awarded together with interest. If within the said period of 3 months, the petitioner does not deposit before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Wages Act the amount awarded under Ext.P1, it will be open to the respondents to proceed with the revenue recovery proceedings initiated as per Ext.P5. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.21116 of 2011 JUDGMENT Dated:- 3rd August, 2011 --------------------------------------