AYYAPPAN Vs. JOINT LABOUR COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was in the service of the second respondent, a public sector undertaking owned and controlled by the State of Kerala. He resigned from service. At that time he was entitled for payment of gratuity. The petitioner applied to the controlling authority for payment of the gratuity. The Controlling authority in Ext. P3 granted his claim. His claim was for gratuity at the rate of one month wages for every completed year of service in terms of Clause 9 of Ext. P2, which according to the petitioner covered his conditions of service. Ext. P2 is a Government order revising the salary structure and other conditions of the employees of the second respondent. Clause 9 reads as follows:

(2.) THE appellate authority was not correct in directing that it was admitted that the better terms were applicable to persons who retire from service because the basis of the claim of the petitioner itself was Ext. P2 which contain better rates. Clause 9 of Ext. P2 as extracted above raised the rate of gratuity without discriminating the persons who retired from service Or resigned from service. Therefore, the reasons stated by the Tribunal to limit the gratuity payable to the petitioner to 15 days wages for every completed year of service is not correct. The gratuity payable under the Act as per Section 4 (2) is as follows:

(3.) A reading of the entire provisions of Section 4 makes it clear that gratuity payable under the Act is limited to 15 days wages for every completed year and an employee can claim gratuity from the employer if he is entitled for better terms in accordance with any other better provisions of conditions of service. Therefore, the gratuity in terms of Clause 9 of Ext. Government order providing for one month's wages for every completed year is not the gratuity payable under the Act.