Excess gratuity received must be paid to the employee based on statutory provisions and contractual obligations.

JUDGMENT

The prayers in the writ petition are to quash Exts.P2 and P4 and to declare that the petitioner is entitled to get the full amount received by the Bank from the 2^nd respondent towards the gratuity of the petitioner.

2. The 1^st respondent Bank has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is stated that the Payment of Gratuity Act , 1972 establishes a statutory ceiling of Rs.20 lakhs for gratuity payments and as such a retired employee is entitled only to the legally prescribed amount, irrespective of whether any additional sum was received by the bank from the LIC Group Gratuity Scheme. The 2^nd respondent Insurance Company has filed a counter affidavit stating that an amount of Rs.29,71,015/- has been made over to the 1^st respondent towards gratuity payment of the petitioner. Admittedly, only ₹20,00,000/- has been paid by the 1^st respondent to the petitioner out of the said amount.

3. The issue involved is no longer res integra. A Full Bench of this Court inChandrasekharan Nair G. & Ors. V. Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. & Ors. ( 2017 (5) KHC 15 ) has held that any amount in excess of the statutory limit received by the Bank would also go to the employee based on the contract of insurance between the employer and the insurance company.

In the above circumstances, this writ petition is allowed. There will be a direction to the 1^st respondent to pay the balance gratuity amount of ₹9,71,015/- to the petitioner with statutory interest from 30.04.2022 till the date of realisation.