E.ERANI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner says that he retired from the service of the 2nd respondent - Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation (SIDCO for short) as an Assistant General Manager on 30/11/2010 and that he is constrained to approach this Court since the respondents had deducted certain amounts from his Gratuity illegally, as early as in the year 2011.

(2.) The petitioner says that, as is evident from Ext.P2 judgment of this Court obtained by another employee, who was also charge sheeted along with him, it has been categorically held that the withholding of amounts from Gratuity and the denying its full payment is illegal.

(3.) The petitioner asserts that Ext.P2 judgment has been delivered noticing that there is no provision in "Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation Staff Regulations" to withhold any amount from Gratuity towards alleged liabilities and therefore, that he has preferred Ext.P3 representation before the 3rd respondent - Managing Director of the SIDCO; thus alternatively praying that the same be directed to be taken up and disposed of, adverting to the observations in Ext.P2 judgment.