P V CHANDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was an employee with the third respondent working as Deputy Manager. He was appointed as Electrical Engineer with the second respondent on deputation. He reported for duty as Electrical Engineer before the second respondent on 07-12-1998 and continued till 06-03-2002. THE deputation was under sanction from the first respondent and was continued on the request of the 2nd respondent; which was duly sanctioned by the State. After deputation, the petitioner reported for duty with the third respondent as is evident from Ext.P2. THE petitioner then retired as Deputy Manager from the third respondent on 30-12-2007. Undisputedly, the petitioner is entitled to provident fund and gratuity on retirement. THE petitioner is aggrieved by the refusal of the third respondent to disburse the gratuity for the deputation period which according to the third respondent is to be paid based on the formulae contained in Ext.P3; by the second respondent. THE third respondent informed the matter to the second respondent by Ext.P3 dated 01-10-2007 long prior to the retirement of the petitioner so as to enable the payment of the entire gratuity amounts due to the petitioner on his retirement on 30-12-2007. However, the second respondent failed to respond to the same, on which the petitioner personally by Ext.P4 requested the second respondent to do the needful to release the gratuity for the deputation period spent with the second respondent. Second respondent failed to respond to the communication of the 3rd respondent and the petitioner. THE petitioner was retired on 30-12-2007. THE petitioner then issued Ext.P5 lawyer notice to both the respondents 2 and 3 for disbursal of the gratuity amounts due to him for the deputation period with 12 % interest.

(2.) THE repeated request having evoked no response, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court with the above writ petition. THE respondents have not filed counter affidavits nor have they denied the fact that the gratuity amount during the period of deputation has not been disbursed to the petitioner. Entitlement for gratuity of the petitioner for the above mentioned period and the liability to pay the same by the second respondent cannot be disputed. THE second respondent does not also deny the receipt of the request made by the 3rd respondent and the petitioner.

(3.) THE second respondent shall be at liberty to satisfy the liability to the petitioner at the rate of 6% interest per annum, with notice to the third respondent within the two months granted to the 3rd respondent to avoid the further enhanced levy at 10% per annum. THE petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before both the 2nd and 3rd respondents. THE writ petition is allowed as above.