IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 4523 of 2008(L)
1. P.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN, DEPUTY CHIEF
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,
... Respondent
2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (H.R.M)
3. APPELLATE AUTHORITY UNDER THE
For Petitioner :SRI.ARUN.B.VARGHESE
For Respondent :SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB
The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.GIRI
Dated :22/02/2008
O R D E R
V.GIRI,J.
-------------------------
W.P ( C) No. 4523 of 2008
--------------------------
Dated this the 22nd February, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner retired from service on 30.4.2004 as Deputy
Chief Engineer. He is aggrieved that the gratuity due to him is
yet to be disbursed. There is a dispute as to whether the
employees of the Electricity Board are entitled to gratuity in
terms of the provisions of the Payment of Gratuity Act or in
terms of the provisions of the KSR, which are also applicable to
the employees of the Electricity Board. Petitioner had
approached this Court earlier for a direction to the Board to pay
the gratuity due to him. It is not necessary to refer those aspect
in detail.
2. But it is necessary to refer to the fact that as per G.O
(P) No.17/2008/LBR dated 21.1.2008 Government had exempted
the Electricity Board from the provisions of the Payment of
Gratuity Act, 1972. Based on the same, the Board has requested
the Labour Commissioner to drop up all actions under the
Payment of Gratuity Act involving the Kerala State Electricity
W.P ( C) No. 4523 of 2008
2
Board forthwith. In so far as the petitioner is concerned an
amount of Rs.3,50,000/- has been deposited by the Board with
the Regional Labour Commissioner as evidenced by Exhibit P3.
This fact is affirmed by the learned counsel for the Board also.
Petitioner pleads his difficulty in approaching the Regional Joint
Labour Commissioner – the appellate authority under the
payment of Gratuity Act . In view of the Government Order
mentioned above, I agree with the submission made by the
learned counsel in this behalf.
3. I had requested the learned Government Pleader to
ascertain whether there is any objection for the Regional Joint
Labour Commissioner to refund the amount deposited with him
by the Electricity Board for settling the claims for the gratuity
due to the employees of the Electricity Board.
4. On instruction, learned Government Pleader Mr.Bejoy
Chandran submits that the amount deposited in this behalf by
the Board will be refunded without any delay. Obviously it is to
facilitate the Board to settle the claim of persons like the
petitioner.
W.P ( C) No. 4523 of 2008
3
After hearing the counsel on both sides, the writ petition is
disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to withdraw the
requisite amount for settling the gratuity amount due to the
petitioner. This shall be done without any delay, at any rate,
within a period of six weeks from today. At the same time, the
2nd respondent shall pay the amount due to the petitioner by way
of gratuity, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the delay, if any,
in the Electricity Board receiving the amount from the 3rd
respondent shall not stand in the way of amount being paid to
the petitioner in the manner aforementioned.
(V.GIRI, JUDGE)
ma
W.P ( C) No. 4523 of 2008
4
K.THANKAPPAN,J
CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999
ORDER
25th May, 2007