[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Kerala High Court
Sal Kumar G vs Kerala State Beverages (M & M) ... on 26 February, 2026
2026:KER:17285
WP(C) NO. 7637 OF 2026 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2026 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 7637 OF 2026
PETITIONER/S:
1 SAL KUMAR G., AGED 61 YEARS
S/O GANGADHARAN, THULASITHEERTHAM, KALLIAKALTHAZAM,
PERMPUZHA P O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691504
2 S ASOKAN, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O SUGUMARAN, SUDHAMANDRAM,
PERANTHURUTHU, PERUMON P O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691601
3 P USHENDRAN, AGED 72 YEARS
S/O PEETHAMBARAN, KARTIKA, DHANUVACHAPURAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695503
4 N.JAYAKRISHNAN PILLAI, AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. NARAYANAN PILLAI AADARSH BHAVANAM, S.V.M.PO,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM, PIN - 690573
5 V. RAJU, AGED 67 YEARS
S/O. VELU, NIRMALA VILASAM 599-A, NETHAJI NAGAR 129,
AAKOLICHERRY VALATHUNGL PO, KOLLAM, PIN - 691011
6 JULIAN GALIO, AGED 72 YEARS
S/O. ANTONY GALIO GODVIN DALE, MUNDAKKAL WEST,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
7 S. SASI, AGED 76 YEARS
S/O. SORNNAYYAN SAJU NIVAS, A.R.N-113, THEKKEVILA,
ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691016
8 B. SOMARAJAN, AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. BALAKISHNAN, THEKKAYATHU VEEDU, VALATHUNGAL P.O,
ERAVIPURAM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691011
9 S.JAYAPRAKASH, AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. SREEDHARAN R.S. BHAVAN, KALAKOODU P.O, PUTHUKULAM,
PARAVOOR, KOLLAM, PIN - 691302
2026:KER:17285
WP(C) NO. 7637 OF 2026 2
10 J.GOPALA KRISHNAN, AGED 73 YEARS
S/O. JANARDARAN SHOBHA BHAVAN, NETHAGI NAGAR 23 ASRAMAM
P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691002
11 S.ASHOKAN, AGED 73 YEARS
S/O SREEDHARAN ARUN VILLA, SNEHA NAGAR-243
ULLIYAKKOVIL P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691019
12 REGUNATHAN P., AGED 76 YEARS
S/O.PADMANABHAN KOTHARA VEEDU, KUNNATHKAVU NAGAR-1
ERAVIPURAM P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691011
13 N.P. RAJU, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN VADAKKEVILA
NAGAR, VADAKKEVILA P.O, KOLLAM, PIN - 691010
14 GOPALAKRISHNAN S., AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. SHIVARAJAN PARAYATHU VEEDU ,MULLUVILA,
VADAKKEVILA P.O.,KOLLAM, PIN - 691010
BY ADVS.
SHRI.DEEPU THANKAN
SMT.UMMUL FIDA
SMT.LAKSHMI SREEDHAR
SMT.POOJA CHANDRAN
SMT.GAYATHRI G.
SMT. T. J. JUBIL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M & M) CORPORATION LTD.
BEVCO TOWER, VIKASBHAVAN, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR., PIN - 695033
2 KERALA ABKARI WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS CHIEF WELFARE FUND
INSPECTOR., PIN - 695001
SRI. KRISHNAMOORTHY (SC-KAWWFB),
SRI. T. NAVEEN (SC, BEV-CO),
SMT. RESMI THOMAS (GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.02.2026, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2026:KER:17285
WP(C) NO. 7637 OF 2026 3
JUDGMENT
The petitioners in this writ petition assert that they are
similarly placed and are entitled to payment of gratuity based
on the findings of the Ext.P2 judgment of a Division Bench of
this Court in Manoharan D v. Kerala State Beverages
(Manufacturing and Marketing) Corporation; 2025 KHC
2313.
2. The learned Standing Counsel representing the
Kerala State Beverages (M & M) Corporation Ltd (hereinafter
referred to as 'the BEVCO') does not dispute that the
petitioners herein are similarly situated as the appellants in
Manoharan (supra). He submits that review petitions
numbered RP Nos. 51 of 2026 and 65 of 2026 have been filed
to seek review of the judgment in Manoharan (supra) . It is
further submitted by the learned Standing Counsel appearing
for BEVCO that, if R.P. Nos.51 of 2026 and 65 of 2026 are not
entertained by this Court, BEVCO intends to challenge the
judgment in Manoharan (supra) before the Supreme Court, as
the finding that employees similarly situated are entitled to the
payment of gratuity will cause huge financial strain on the
BEVCO.
2026:KER:17285
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
would submit that the claim of the petitioners needs to be
considered only after any challenge to the judgment in
Manoharan (supra) is concluded.
Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners in this case and the learned Standing Counsel
appearing for BEVCO, I am of the opinion that this writ petition
can be disposed of on consent, directing that the competent
authority of BEVCO shall consider the claim of the petitioners
in accordance with the law, after the judgment in Manoharan
(supra) attains finality. Since it is submitted by the learned
Standing Counsel appearing for BEVCO that, if R.P Nos. 51 of
2026 and 65 of 2026 are not entertained by this Court, for any
reason, BEVCO intends to challenge the judgment in
Manoharan (supra) before the Supreme Court, it is made
clear that the consideration of the claims raised by the
petitioners will also be subject to the result of any Special
Leave Petition that BEVCO may seek to file against the
judgment in Manoharan (supra). In light of the above, no time
limit is being fixed for the consideration of the claims of the
petitioners for the payment of gratuity. The right of the
2026:KER:17285
petitioners to approach this Court if there is undue delay in
considering their claims will stand expressly reserved.
Sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
ajt
2026:KER:17285
WP(C) NO. 7637 OF 2026 6
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 7637 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1 THE SERVICE DETAILS OF THE PETITIONERS
INCLUDING THE ID NUMBERS AND DATE OF
RETIREMENT DATED NIL
Exhibit P-2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE
Exhibit P-3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT IN WP(C) NO. 5006/2026 DATED 10/02/2026
