Kerala High Court
M.Manoharan Pillai vs The Kerala State Electricity Board on 16 February, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 27TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 34921 OF 2014
PETITIONER:
M.MANOHARAN PILLAI
AGED 61 YEARS
D-
57,KRISNAKRIPA,PNRA,KOWDIAR.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURA
M-695003.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.G.ARUN
SRI.ARJUN RAGHAVAN
SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,VYDYUTHI
BHAVAN,PATTOM PALACE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
2 THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,VYDYUTHI
BHAVANAM,PATTOM PALACE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
3 THE CHIEF ENGINEERHRM
KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD,VYDYUTHI
BHAVANAM,PATTOM PALACE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695004.
BY ADV SRI.M.K.THANKAPPAN, SC, KERALA STATE
ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMIT
BY ADVS: SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR.GP
SRI.M.K.THANKAPPAN, STANDING COUNSEL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 16.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.© No.34921 of 2014
:2 :
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.34921 of 2014
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of February, 2024.
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following
reliefs:
a) To issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records
leading to the issuance of Exhibit P6 and quash the same.
b) To declare that the petitioner is entilted 10% interest
for Rs.29,177/- from 01.03.2000 to 02.05.2009
c) To grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit in the circumstances of the case.
2. Petitioner entered in the service of the Kerala
State Electricity Board during the year 1978. While
working as Junior Assistant, the petitioner took voluntary
retirement on 29.02.2000. At the time of voluntary
retirement, the petitioner has got 22 years of service and
as per the existing rules, the service of the petitioner is
considered as 27 years, is the submission. After the
retirement, all the benefits were calculated and disbursed
by the respondents vide Ext.P1 order dated 18.02.2002.
The gratuity of the petitioner is fixed as Rs.1,81,413/-. It
is submitted that there is dispute with regard to the
balance of gratuity and interest thereupon for the period
of service rendered and the petitioner along with others
filed cases before the Controlling Authority under the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. Some of the employees
approached this Court for the balance gratuity and this
Court directed the petitioners therein to approach the
authority provided under the Payment of Gratuity Act,
1972. The Controlling Authority was pleased to pass an
award in favour of the petitioner and others, whereby it
was held that the petitioner was entitled for a further
amount of Rs.29,177/-.
3. It is submitted that in Ext.P2, the Authority
took the period of service of the petitioner as 27 years
by taking into account the fact that the petitioner has got
7 years more when he took the voluntary retirement. The
Controlling Authority directed the Board to pay the
balance of gratuity as determined to the petitioner with
10% simple interest from the date on which it fell due
within 30 days on receipt of the order. Thereafter,
petitioner received a communication from the office of
the Labour Officer, Thiruvananthapuram, whereby the
petitioner was directed to be present on 12.05.2009 with
two witnesses to accept the cheque, as evident from
Ext.P2 order.
4. Later, it was found that in the place of
Rs.1,89,648/-, the Board deposited only Rs.1,81,413/-. It
is submitted that above all, the Board did not pay the
interest amount, which the petitioner was entitled as per
Ext.P2 order. It is also submitted that on oral enquiry,
the petitioner was served with a revision worksheet
without any covering letter, is the submission. It was
shown that the gratuity payable is only Rs.1,81,413/- and
an excess amount of Rs.40,523/- was paid to the
petitioner, which is recoverable. The petitioner filed
Ext.P3 representation before the Accounts Member of the
Board. Subsequently, the petitioner received a
communication dated 9.4.2014 from the 3 rd respondent
stating that petitioner is liable to repay an excess amount
of Rs.40523/- being received by the petitioner in excess
of eligible gratuity. Aggrieved by the same, this writ
petition is filed.
5. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and
the learned Standing Counsel.
6. It is an admitted fact that the Controlling
Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act passed an
award, as evident by Ext.P2. It is also an admitted fact
that the principal amount is already received by the
petitioner as ordered by the Gratuity Authority. Now, the
Electricity Board is proceeding to recover the amount
ordered by the Gratuity Authority without challenging the
award passed by the Gratuity Authority. I am of the
considered opinion that such a recovery is not legally
permissible. Admittedly, Ext.P2 is not challenged by the
Board. If that be the case, the recovery is illegal.
Therefore, this writ petition is allowed. Ext.P2 is
set aside. The question regarding the interest payable to
the petitioner as per the award of the Gratuity Authority
is left open. The petitioner can do the needful in
accordance with law.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
smv
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 34921/2014
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.PA.XIV/PPO.27631 DATED 18/02/2002
EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER
DATED 28.02.2006 IN G.C.605/04 OF THE
CONTROLLING AUTHORITY/DISTRICT LABOUR
OFFICER,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE
COMMUNICATION DATED 02.05.2009 OF THE
DISTRICT LABOUR
OFFICER,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
EXT.P3(A) COPY OF THE ENGLISH
TRANSLATION OF EXT.P3
EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION
WORKSHEET DATED 27/10/2012
EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE
REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE ACCOUNTS MEMBER OF THE
BOARD DATED 06/03/2014
EXT.P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE
COMMUNICATION NO.EBPS 24/2271/2000
DATED 09/04/2014 OF THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
