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.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the claim of the petitioners needs to be considered only aft