The Kerala State Co-Operative ... vs B.Mithran
2021 Latest Caselaw 3947 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

    WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 14TH MAGHA,1942

                RP.No.1010 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 30566/2019

  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.30566/2019(U) DATED 11.12.2019
                                -------


REVIEW PETITIONER/S:

                THE KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
                REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER,
                KANNUR REGION,
                REGIONAL OFFICE, KANNUR - 670001.

                BY ADV. SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         B.MITHRAN, AGED 59 YEARS, BHARATHI VILAS,
                KANNUKKARA P.O., MADAPPALLY COLLEGE,
                VADAKARA - 673 102.

      2         M.P.SASI, MUNDAPLACKAL, KADATHAMKADAVU,
                IRITTY P.O., KANNUR - 670 703.

      3         K.V.VENUGOPALAN, THAPASYA, VAKAKKUMPAD,
                MUNDALUR P.O., KANNUR.

      4         THE ADMINISTRATOR, THE KANNUR DISTRICT
                CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KANNUR - 670 001.

      5         THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
                LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF KOZHIKODE DIVISION,
                DIVISIONAL OFFICE, P AND GS DEPARTMENT,
                7TH FLOOR, JEEVAN PRAKASH, KOZHIKODE - 673 001.

                BY ADV.SRI.P.N.MOHANAN
                BY ADV.SMT.PRABHA R.MENON
                BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.S.GOPINATHAN


THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.02.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 R.P.No.1010/2020                    2



                                  ORDER

Dated this the 3rd day of February 2021

The petitioners in the writ petition are the

employees of the first respondent. They retired from

service. They approached this Court with the writ

petition claiming gratuity under the LIC Scheme.

This Court ordered payment of gratuity as per the

LIC Scheme.

2. The review petition has come up at the

instance of the first respondent urging that there

was erroneous computation of salary for the purpose

of contribution and therefore, the petitioners are

not entitled to the entire amount from the LIC under

the LIC Scheme.

3. In fact, this Court had not gone into the

question of computation of the income for the

purpose of gratuity. This Court only ordered payment

of gratuity under the LIC Scheme. If there is any

dispute between the parties in regard to the

computation of the gratuity payable, that can be

adjudicated and decided in separate proceedings.

In view of the fact that the points urged in

the review petition are not the subject matter of

the writ petition, it is appropriate to leave open

those issues. There is no error apparent in regard

to the directions given. In such circumstances, I

find no scope to review the judgment. Accordingly,

the review petition is dismissed.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

JUDGE

ln

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE CANNANORE DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK EMPLOYEES GROUP GRATUITY-CUM-LIFE ASSURANCE SCHEME.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE