Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 11512
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
DR.P.K.CHANDRASEKHARA PILLAI, – Appellant
Versus
KERALA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT, – Respondent
WP(C)/42109/2018
SHRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, STATE COUNCIL OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING SRI.IMAM GRIGORIOS KARAT, SC, KERALA FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Eligibility for gratuity must follow the rules in effect at retirement, which in this case set the limit at Rs.20 lakhs without executive restrictions.
Headnote:
Gratuity - Eligibility - Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Sections regarding gratuity entitlement without upper limit and amendments.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the limitation of gratuity to Rs.10 lakhs despite being entitled to more, based on years of service as a Senior Scientist, after retirement in 2018.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant is entitled to gratuity as per the amendment allowing Rs.20 lakhs, confirming previous court rulings on gratuity limits.
Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to gratuity without an upper limit, as per the relevant service rules and amendments to the Payment of Gratuity Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The applicable rules did not impose a ceiling limit on gratuity following the relevant amendments, leading to the entitlement of the full amount due.
Final Decision: The writ petition is allowed, and the respondents must disburse the full amount of gratuity with interest.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is challenging the denial of a part of the gratuity due to him. Petitioner also seeks for a declaration that he is eligible to be paid the entire gratuity due, based upon his last drawn pay and the number of years of service put in by him, without any upper ceiling.
2. Petitioner contends that he commenced his service on
18.10.1983 and after completion of 35 years of service, he superannuated on 31.10.2018, as a Senior Scientist/Scientist E1, at the Kerala Forest Research Institute. However, as part of the gratuity, though he was entitled to more than Rs.19 lakhs, respondents limited the same to Rs.10 lakhs, contrary to the law declared by this Court. In spite of repeated requests, it was alleged that petitioner has not been paid the eligible gratuity due to him, which has compelled him to approach this Court, seeking directions for payment of gratuity with interest.
3. In the counter affidavit filed by respondents 1 and 2, it was pleaded that petitioner had retired from service on 31.10.2018 and the entire amount of gratuity due to him was paid. It was further pleaded that, without any objection, he had accepted the entire gratuity and that now a belated claim is preferred. According to the respondents, the petitioner ought to have impleaded the Government of Kerala as a party since the first respondent is fully financed by the Government of Kerala, whose instructions are binding upon it. The respondents have also stated that as per the rule, a retired employee is entitled to gratuity at the rate of half month's emoluments which the employee drew last for each completed year of service qualifying for gratuity with the maximum limit of Rs.10 lakhs. On such a basis, the claim of the petitioner was sought to be dismissed.
4. Through a reply affidavit, petitioner has averred that the Kerala Forest Research Institute is governed by the service regulations framed by the Kerala State Council for Science, Technology and Environment and as per the said rules, an employee retiring from service was eligible for gratuity and that no ceiling limit is prescribed. When the first respondent attempted to bring an upper limit to the gratuity for the State Government Employees to Rs.10 lakhs, this court in W.P.(C) No. 25584 of 2011 interfered and directed the grant of benefits as per the relevant service rules without being restrained by any executive instructions. It was pleaded that in view of the above decision of this Court, petitioner is entitled to gratuity without any upper ceiling limit for the entire period of service. It is further pleaded that though an amendment was brought in on 16.08.2019, produced as Ext.P5, which incorporated a note to clause 14(1) of the KSCSTE Rules that payment of gratuity shall be as per the amount proclaimed by the Government of Kerala from time to time, the said amendment has no effect on the petitioner for two reasons (i) the amendment came into effect only from 16.08.2019, which is after the date of retirement of the petitioner and (ii) the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 was amended on 28.03.2018 wherein the limit of Rs.10 lakhs was replaced by the words “such amount as may be notified by the Central Government from time to time”. Thus as on the date of retirement of the petitioner, the rules prescribed an upper limit of Rs.20 lakhs, which was the amount fixed by the Central Government by notification dated
29-03-2018.
5. I have heard the arguments of Sri.V. Sajith Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, the learned counsel for respondents 1 to 3 and Smt.Sabeena P. Ismail, the learned Government Pleader for the additional 4th respondent.
6. Petitioner had retired from service on 31-10-2018. He is entitled to be paid gratuity as per the rules in force as on the date of his retirement. Under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 , the ceiling limit of Rs.10 lakhs was substituted by the words “such amount as may be notified by the Central Government from time to
