IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ASHOK BHUSHAN, A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JJ.
Kerala Forest Research Institute - Appellant
v.
Renuka - Respondent
W.A. No.1 of 2015 and connected cases
Decided On : 01-10-2015
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Section 4(5) - Contract - Service conditions - Gratuity - Finding of - Scope of - Held, There is one more reason due to which right given under S.4(5) cannot be taken away by S.14. Section 4(5) provides that nothing in section shall affect right of an employee to receive better terms of gratuity under any award or agreement or contract with the employer - Better terms of gratuity under the award or agreement or contract have been saved and the employee has given right to opt for that. S.14 gives an overriding effect over other enactment - It is clear that Apex Court has treated that terms and conditions of employment i.e., any scheme regulating payment of gratuity is part of terms and conditions framed by employer and as part of contract within meaning of S.4(5)
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.
1. All these Writ Appeals have been filed against the common judgment dated 12.11.2014 delivered by a learned Single Judge in W.P(C) No.2241 of 2012 and other connected Writ Petitions. All the Writ Petitions have been allowed by the learned Single Judge, aggrieved by which judgment respondents to the Writ Petitions have come up in these Writ Appeals.
2. The Writ Appeals can be divided into three groups: The first group consists of Writ Appeal Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 filed by the Kerala Forest Research Institute (for short, ‘the K.F.R.I.”) which Institute was the 3rd respondent in W.P(C) No.2241 of 2012 and W.P(C) No.25584 of 2011. The second group consists of W.A. Nos.4, 5, 7, 10, 21, 32 of 2015 and 1992 of 2014 filed by the Kerala State Council for Science and Technology and Environment and others. The third group consists of the Writ Appeals filed by the State being W.A. Nos.1313, 1526, 1578, 1628, 1651 and 1755 of 2015 challenging the same judgment. By the judgment dated 12.11.2014, Writ Petition Nos.2241 of 2012, 25584 of 2011, 26114 of 2011, 27835 of 2012, 27836 of 2012, 27845 of 2012 and 2235 of 2012 have been allowed.
3. Facts and issues raised in all the Writ Petitions as well as the Writ Appeals being common, it shall suffice to refer to the pleadings in W.P(C) No.2241 of 2012 and W.A. Nos.2, 1578 and 1992 of 2014 filed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge. A few facts of other Writ Petitions and Writ Appeals shall also be referred to, if necessary.
4. The background facts giving rise to these Writ Appeals are: Petitioners in the Writ Petitions were initially appointed in the K.F.R.I. and Centre for Earth Science Studies (for short, “the C.E.S.S.”). Apart from these two Institutes, there were 4 other Research Institutes functioning in the Kerala State, viz., Tropical Botanic Garden and Research Institute, Centre for Water Resources Development and Management, National Transportation, Planning and Research Centre and Kerala School of Mathematics. The Government by Order dated 06.11.2002 decided to constitute a registered Society, viz., Kerala State Council for Technology and Environment (for short, “the K.S.C.S.T.E.”) as an autonomous body to bring into the umbrella of the Council all the six Institutes. On 26.11.2002, the K.S.C.S.T.E. came into existence as a registered Society under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Act, 1955. The Council also framed separate Rules for regulating conditions of service and other matters which were made effective from 19.06.2003. All employees working in the aforementioned six Institutes started to be governed by the Service Rules and Regulations of the State Council with effect from 19.06.2003. Rules and Regulations framed by the Council are comprehensive Rules and Regulations covering the service conditions of the employees regarding promotion, leave, conduct, gratuity, etc. Petitioners in W.P.(C)No.2241 of 2012 and 25584 of 2011 entered into the service of the K.F.R.I. as Scientists and after the Institute being governed by the Council, they started to be governed by the Rules and Regulations of the Council. The gratuity amount payable to employees under the K.F.R.I. have been linked with the Life Insurance Corporation of India (for short, “the L.I.C.) whereunder premiums are paid by the K.F.R.I. to the L.I.C. based on the gratuity amount payable to the employees concerned in terms of the Rules and Regulations of the Council. Even prior to the framing of the Rules and Regulations by the Council, there were separate rules for payment of retiral benefits by the Institutes. The K.F.R.I. also contained Rule 23A providing for payment of gratuity at the rate of half month’s wages which the employee drew last, for each completed year of service qualifying for gratuity. The employees of K.F.R.I. even before being governed
D.T.C. Retired Employees Association and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation
Som Prakash Rekhi v. Union of India
Beed District Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. State of Maharashta and others
Y.K. Singla v. Punjab National Bank and others
Retnavalli v. Ambalapadu Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.
Nedupuzha Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Rugmini
The Travancore Cements Employees Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Ramachandran Nair
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.