Kerala High Court
The Manager Life Insurance Corporation ... vs James Mathew on 13 May, 2025
Author: N.Nagaresh
Bench: N.Nagaresh
2025:KER:32655
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 23RD VAISAKHA, 1947
RP NO. 1138 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.41613 OF 2018 OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/4th RESPONDENT:
THE MANAGER LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED
DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
PENSION DIVISION ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY ADV.
SRI.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:
1 JAMES MATHEW
AGED 59 YEARS
KADAVUMBHAGOM, PATHANAPURAM P.O.,
PAMPADY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 686501
2 P.K. MATHEW
AGED 59 YEARS
PALLIPARAMBIL, THATTARATHU P.O.,
KARUKUNNAM, PIN - 686585
3 O.K.SATHESSAN
AGED 58 YEARS
OLAKATHILEDAYA P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686662
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
2
4 JOSE JOSEPH
AGED 59 YEARS
KARINGADA HOUSE
KOORACHUNDUP.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673527
5 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
6 THE SECRETARY ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT
2ND FLOOR, ANNEX-II SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
7 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
MEAT PRODUCTS OF INDIA
EDAYAR P.O, KOOTHATTUKULAM, PIN - 686662
BY ADVS.
SMT.K.L.LAKSHMI RANI,STANDING COUNSEL
SMT.VINAYAKUMARI-R1-R4
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.02.2025 ALONG WITH RP.60/2025, THE COURT ON 13.05.2025
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MAY 2025 / 23RD VAISAKHA, 1947
RP NO. 60 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.41613 OF 2018 OF
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/3RD RESPONDENT
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
MEAT PRODUCTS OF INDIA EDAYAR P.O.,
KOOTHATTUKULAM, PIN - 686662
BY ADV.
K.L.LAKSHMI RANI
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER:
1 JAMES MATHEW
S/O. K.P. MATHEW, KADAVUMBHAGOM,
PATHANAPURAM P.O., PAMPADY,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686501
2 P.K. MATHEW
S/O. P.C. KORAH,
PALLIPARAMBIL THATTARATHU P.O.,
KARUKUNNAM, PIN - 686585
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
4
3 O.K. SATHESSAN
S/O. P.A. KRISHNAN, OLAKKATHIL,
EDAYAR P.O., KOOTHATTUKULAM,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686662
4 JOSE JOSEPH
S/O. JOSEPH, KARINGADA HOUSE,
KOORACHUNDU P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN - 673527
5 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
6 THE SECRETARY,
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT
2ND FLOOR, ANNEX II, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
7 THE MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF
INDIA LIMITED,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PENSION DIVISION,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011
BY ADVS.
SRI.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA
SRI.PAILY MEACHINKARA
SRI.V.VENUGOPAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
28.02.2025 ALONG WITH RP.1138/2024, THE COURT ON
13.05.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
5
ORDER
Dated this the 13th day of May, 2025
[RP Nos.1138/2024 & 60/2025]
Respondents 3 and 4 in W.P.(C) No.41613 of 2018
have filed these Review Petitions alleging errors apparent on
the face of the records in the judgment dated 29.08.2024 in
W.P.(C) No.41613 of 2018.
2. W.P.(C) No.41613 of 2018 was filed by retired
employees of Meat Products of India Limited stating that they
were enrolled by the employer in a Group Gratuity Scheme
framed by the Life Insurance Corporation and that the entire
amounts in the Group Gratuity Scheme has not been
disbursed to the petitioners. The petitioners sought to direct
respondents 2 to 4 to pay the balance amount of Gratuity due
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
from the Life Insurance Corporation with interest to the
petitioners.
3. This Court found that the legal issue involved in the
writ petition had come up for consideration before this Court
and before the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Hon'ble Apex
Court has laid down the law in this regard. This Court
therefore disposed of the writ petition following Exts.P18 to
P21 judgments directing the 4th respondent to pay the
petitioners the balance amount of Gratuity along with 6%
interest.
4. In the judgment in Chandrasekharan Nair G. and
others v. Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural
Development Bank Limited [2017 (4) KLT 276], a Full Bench
of this Court held that an employee is entitled to the higher
amount of Gratuity if he has opted in terms of Section 4 (5) of
the Payment of Gratuity (Central) Act, 1972 even if a lesser
amount is due under Section 4(2) thereof. Any amount in
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
excess of the Gratuity due would also go to the employee
since the contract of insurance would fall within the ambit of
Section 4(5) of the Payment of Gratuity (Central) Act. Any
deficit in the amount due as Gratuity to the employee, after
payment by the insurer has to be met by the employer only,
as the liability squarely rests on him. The Full Bench judgment
which dealt with the employees of Co-operative Societies was
followed in respect of the employees of Public Sector
Undertakings also in Ext.P21 judgment in W.P.(C) No. 20057
of 2018. It was following those judgments, that the writ petition
was disposed of.
5. The review petitioner-insurer in RP No.1138/2024
would urge that contributions are made to the fund to secure
Gratuity liability to the extent and required by the employer.
The quantum of Gratuity payable to the employee by the
employer at the time of retirement is decided by the employer
as per the terms and conditions of employment. It is the duty
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
of the employer to pay the balance amount, if any, due
towards Gratuity to its employees and the Life Insurance
Corporation has no further role in this matter.
6. In RP No.60/2025, the 3rd respondent-employer
would urge that respondents 1 to 4 retired during the period
between 19.05.2016 and 19.02.2018 and they have received
wages as on the respective dates of their retirement.
Therefore, the judgment relied on by this Court will not apply
to them. The ceiling on Gratuity was revised with effect from
29.03.2018. Therefore, respondents 1 to 4 are not entitled to
get any amount over and above ₹10 lakhs as Gratuity as
claimed by them. On these premises, the revision petitioners
seek to review the judgment.
7. From the judgment sought to be reviewed, I find
that this Court as per Ext.P16 judgment has held that an
employee is entitled to higher amount of Gratuity, if he has
opted in terms of Section 4(5) of the Payment of Gratuity
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
(Central) Act. For payment of Gratuity, the employer had
availed a policy from the insurer and the premium were paid
on behalf of the employees. Therefore, at the time of
retirement, the employees are entitled to get full accrued
amount as Gratuity. The maturity value from master policy
would go to the credit of the dues of the employees.
Therefore, I do not find any error on the face of the
records of the case, warranting review of the judgment in
W.P.(C) No.41613/2018. The Review Petitions are therefore
dismissed.
Sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
hmh
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
29-08-2024 IN WPC NO. 41613 OF 2018 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT
2025:KER:32655
RP Nos.1138 of 2024 & 60 of 2025
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. M.S. NO.
304/97/AD DATED 25.11.1997 ALONG WITH
STAFF REGULATIONS OF MEAT PRODUCTS OF
INDIA LTD.
Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMORANDUM
NO.W-02/0020/2018- DPE (WC)-GL- XII/I8
DATED 11.04.2018 ISSUED BY THE
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HEAVY
INDUSTRIES & PUBLIC ENTERPRISES
