Ashok Bhushan, J.

A Division Bench, while hearing the above Original Petitions was faced with conflicting judgments of two Division Benches, i.e., Syndicate Bank v. Celine Thomas (2005 KHC 1841) and State Bank of Travancore and Others v. P. Gopinathan Nair and Others (W.A.No.2185 of 2009 decided on 10th June, 2011). By the referring order dated 08.02.2016, the Division Bench made a reference to a larger Bench for authoritative pronouncement on the whole issue, in consequence of which the matter has been placed before this Full Bench.

2. For answering the reference, it is necessary to note the facts of both the Original Petitions.

O.P.No.20427 of 1997

3. Petitioner who was working as an Officer in the Canara Bank retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.08.1993. Salary revision for Officers of Public Sector Banks was discussed by the Indian Banks' Association (IBA) High Power Committee and representatives of Officers of Organisations of Public Sector Banks. An agreement dated 23.06.1995 was entered between the IBA and All India Bank Officers Confederation wherein various recommendations were made regarding scales of pay, fitment, dearness allowance, house rent allowance, city compensatory allowance, provident fund, advance increment, gratuity and some other benefits. The agreement also fixed different dates for extending various benefits as recommended by the agreement. Clause 15 of the agreement provided that scales of pay and dearness allowance shall be revised from 01.07.1993 whereas for entitlement of gratuity, medical aid, hospitalisation expenses, second stagnation increment in scale III and certain other allowances, the date fixed was 01.11.1994. The petitioner who had retired on 31.08.1993 although was given the benefit of revision of scales of pay and dearness allowance with effect from 01.07.1993, he was not entitled for gratuity which was made effective from 01.11.1994. Petitioner demanded payment of arrears of gratuity due to him on the revised scales of pay effected from 01.07.1993, but the Bank declined to pay the same on the premise that as per the proviso to Regulation 46(2) of the Canara Bank (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979 amended in pursuance of the wage settlement, the gratuity payable to the Officers who retired between 01.07.1993 and 31.10.1994 is to be calculated based on the pre-revised scales. Reply dated 27.08.1997 was sent by the Bank to the petitioner rejecting the request for payment of gratuity based on the revised pay scale. Petitioner alleging discrimination and unfair treatment has filed the Original Petition praying for the following reliefs:

"(a) Call for the records relating to Ext.P4 and declare that part of Ext.P4 amendment which denies gratuity on the basis of revised basic pay effective from 01.07.1993, to the petitioner and officer employees who retired during the period 1.7.1993 to 31.10.1994, as unconstitutional and invalid.

(b) Declare that petitioner is entitled to get gratuity on the basis of his revised Basic Pay effective from 1.7.1993.

(c) Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondent to calculate the gratuity payable to petitioner on the basis of his revised basic pay effective from 1.7.1993 and to pay the petitioner arrears of gratuity thereof after deducting the gratuity already paid to him, with interest at 18% per annum from 16.8.1997 till the date of payment.

(d) Issue such other writ, direction or order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

(e) Award the costs of the petitioner in these proceedings."

O.P. No.3489 of 1997

4. Petitioners who are 18 in number were working as Officers of the State Bank of Travancore retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on various dates between 01.07.1993 and 30.10.1994. Subsequ