Mudakkuzha Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Solamon N.M.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN** ## **MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/21ST JYAISHTA 1934** ## **RP.No. 918 of 2011** **--------------------------[AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.14016/2011 DATED 04-08-2011 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT]** **...........** ## **REVIEW PETITIONER/1ST RESPONDENT:** **-----------------------------------------------------------** **MUDAKKUZHA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.693, MUDAKKUZHA P.O, PIN -683 546, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** **BY ADVS.SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN, SRI.JEEMON K.ABRAHAM.** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENT 2:** **---------------------------------------------------------------------** **1. SOLAMON.N.M, MUDAKKUZHA SERVICECO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. NO.693, MUDAKKUZHA P.O, PIN - 683 546** **2. REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES (GENERAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.** ## ***ADDL. R.3. IMPLEADED:** **3. LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, ERNAKULAM DIVISION, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER (PENSION & GROUP SCHEME), `JEEVAN PRAKASH', M.G. ROAD, COCHIN - 682 011.** ***ADDL. R3. IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 11/06/2012 IN I.A. NO.13/12.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI. P.N. MOHANAN, R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. P. MAYA. ADDL. R3. BY ADV. SMT. PRABHA R.MENON, S.C.** **THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **R.P.NO.918/2011:** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:** ## **ANNEXURE 1: COPY OF THE RESOLUTION DTD. 17/12/2009 SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DTD. 19/06/2006 ISSUED BY THE R.3.** - **ANNEXURE 2: COPY OF THE INTIMATION GIVEN TO THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA.** - **ANNEXURE 3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION DTD. 19/08/2011.** - **ANNEXURE 4: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION DTD. 16/09/2011.** - **ANNEXURE 5: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 13/09/2011 SENT BY THE REVIEW PETITIONER TO THE R.1.** ## **RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:** **EXT. R3.A: ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT DTD. 25/03/2010.** - **EXT.R3.B: DISCHARGE RECEIPT DTD 29/03/2010.** - **EXT.R3.C: ACTUARIAL VALUATION REPORT DTD. 16/02/2011.** **EXT.R3.D: LETTER DTD. 10/08/2011. EXT.R3.E: STATEMENT DTD. 16/09/2011.** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A. TO JUDGE.** **Prv.** ## **P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.** ## **-------------------------------------Review Petition No.918 of 2011 in WP(C) No.14016 of 2011 --------------------------------------Dated this the 11[th] day of June, 2012** ## **O R D E R** The first respondent in WP(C) No.14016 of 2011 has filed this review petition seeking a review of the judgment delivered by this Court on 4.8.2011 whereby this Court directed the review petitioner to pay to the writ petitioner, the sum of `.1,89,077/- towards gratuity within one month from the date of the judgment. 2. The writ petitioner was an employee of the review petitioner society. He retired from service on 31.3.2010. Upon retirement he was paid the sum of `3,50,000/- by way of gratuity. The writ petition was filed contending that though the Life Insurance Corporation of India had under the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme paid over to the review petitioner, the sum of `5,39,077/- for payment of gratuity to the writ petitioner, the sum of `3,50,000/- alone was disbursed. Relying on the decisions of this Court in **Retnavalli** v. **Ambalapadu Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.** (2005 (3) KLT 320) and **Nedupuzha Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.** v. **Rugmini** (2011 (3) KLT 134) it was contended that as the sum of `5,39,077/- was paid over by the Life Insurance Corporation of India under the Group R.P. No.918 of 2011 -2- Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme, the writ petitioner is entitled to payment of the entire amount received by the review petitioner from the Life Insurance Corporation of India. 3. The Life Insurance Corporation of India was not a party to the writ petition. Along with the writ petition the writ petitioner had produced Ext.P2 letter dated 29.3.2010 sent from the Ernakulam Divisional Office of the Life Insurance Corporation of India to the review petitioner society enclosing with it a cheque for the sum of `.5,39,077/- for payment to the writ petitioner. The review petitioner did not dispute the fact that it had received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, a cheque for `5,39,077/- for payment of gratuity to the writ petitioner. It was in such circumstances, that the judgment sought to be reviewed was delivered on 4.8.2011. The relevant portions of the judgment are extracted below for easy reference: _2. The respondents have been served and they have entered appearance. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent bank submitted that though the sum of Rs.5,39,077/- was received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, the petitioner was paid only the sum of Rs.3.50 lakhs which according to the learned counsel was the petitioner's entitlement under the Payment of Gratuity Act. The stand taken by the first respondent, in my opinion, cannot be countenanced in view of the authoritative pronouncement of this Court in_ _**Nedupuzha Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.** v._ _**Rugmini** (2011 (3) KLT 134) wherein the decision of the learned single Judge in Retnavalli's case (supra) was affirmed. The division Bench also held that wherever the societies have taken group gratuity policies and the amount paid therein exceeds the sum of Rs.3.50 lakhs, the employee covered by the policy is entitled to receive the entire amount_ R.P. No.918 of 2011 -3- _received by the employer from the Life Insurance Corporation of India. The petitioner was therefore entitled to receive the entire sum of Rs.5,39,077/- received by the first respondent bank from the Life Insurance Corporation of India._ _I accordingly dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the first respondent to disburse to the petitioner the sum of Rs.1,89,077/- (Rs.5,39,077 - Rs.3,50,000) within one month from today, failing which the petitioner will be entitled to realise in addition to the said sum, simple interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the sum of Rs.1,89,077 from 1.4.2010 onwards._ 4. This review petition was filed on 13.12.2011 along with a petition to condone the delay of 82 days. It is stated that the Board of Directors of the review petitioner society that met on 17.12.2009 had resolved vide Annexure-I resolution to request the Life Insurance Corporation of India to convert the master policy taken under the Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme into a policy under the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme without delay, that thereupon Annexure-2 letter dated 19.12.2009 was sent by the review petitioner to the Life Insurance Corporation of India giving consent for conversion from Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme to Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme, that shortly thereafter the writ petitioner retired from service on 31.3.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation, that later, the Life Insurance Corporation of India sent a cheque for `5,39,077/- to the review petitioner for payment of gratuity to the writ petition and that out of the said amount the sum of `3,50,000/- alone was paid over to the writ petitioner. It is stated R.P. No.918 of 2011 -4- that after the judgment sought to be reviewed was delivered, the Life Insurance Corporation of India sent Annexure-3 letter dated 19.8.2011 to the effect that the sum of Rs.1,89,077/- was paid in excess of the ceiling on gratuity under the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme, that in reply to a query raised by the review petitioner the Life Insurance Corporation of India sent Annexure-4 letter dated 16.9.2011 reiterating their stand that the ceiling on gratuity under the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme is only `3,50,000/-, that thereupon the review petitioner sent Annexure-5 letter dated 13.9.2011 to the writ petitioner, informing him of the above facts, that in the meanwhile he filed Contempt of Court Case No.1236 of 2011 alleging non-compliance with the judgment sought to be reviewed and that it is in such circumstances that the instant review petition has been filed seeking a review of the judgment delivered on 4.8.2011 in WP(C) No.14016 of 2011. 5. After the review petition was admitted, on application filed by the review petitioner as I.A.No.13 of 2010, the Life Insurance Corporation of India was impleaded as the additional third respondent in the review petition. The additional third respondent has filed a statement dated 19.3.2012. It is stated that the review petitioner had taken a policy under the Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme in the year 1986 with a ceiling of `3,50,000/- on the gratuity payable to R.P. No.918 of 2011 -5- its employees, that by Annexure-1 resolution dated 17.12.2009 the review petitioner resolved to request the Life Insurance Corporation of India to convert the policy taken under the Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme to one under the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme and thereupon, Annexure-2 consent letter dated 19.12.2009 was issued. It is stated that though under the Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme, the ceiling on gratuity was `3,50,000/- which was fixed at the request of the review petitioner society, when the review petitioner resolved to migrate to the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme no specification of the limit of gratuity was given and therefore, the Life Insurance Corporation of India had sent Ext.R3(A) report dated 25.3.2010 showing the ceiling on the limit of gratuity as `.10 lakhs, that in the meanwhile, the Life Insurance Corporation of India received a request from the review petitioner for settlement of the gratuity claim of the writ petitioner who was due to retire on 31.3.2010, that the Life Insurance Corporation of India thereupon paid the sum of `5,39,077/- to the review petitioner, that at the time of renewal of the Policy the review petitioner informed the Life Insurance Corporation of India that it had earlier consented only to conversion of the policy from Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme to Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme and had not consented for raising the limit of gratuity from R.P. No.918 of 2011 -6- `3,50,000/- to `10 lakhs, that thereupon Ext.R3(C) letter dated 16.2.2011 was sent showing the ceiling on gratuity as `3,50,000/-, that thereafter the review petitioner society sent Ext.R3(D) letter dated 10.8.2011 to the Life Insurance Corporation of India stating that as per the master policy, the ceiling on gratuity is limited to `3,50,000/- and premium was collected only for that amount, but a cheque for `5,39,077/- was received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, that the employee now claims the entire amount received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India and therefore an immediate reply in the matter is awaited. It is stated that thereupon the additional third respondent sent Ext.R3(E) letter dated 16.9.2011 to the effect that ceiling on gratuity was taken as `10 lakhs at the time of conversion of the policy into Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme pursuant to board resolution dated 17.12.2009 and consent letter dated 19.12.2009, that on receipt of the letter dated 5.3.2010 sent by the employer society and the board resolution dated 3.3.2010 which accompanied it, the Life Insurance Corporation of India determined the gratuity payable to the writ petitioner as `5,39,077/having regard to his last drawn salary, that it was later that the Life Insurance Corporation of India was informed that consent had been given only for conversion from Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme to Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme and not for R.P. No.918 of 2011 -7- increasing the ceiling on gratuity to `10 lakhs and that by Ext.R3(E) letter, the review petitioner society was informed that as the liability to pay gratuity is to be discharged by the employer as per the rules and that the role of the Life Insurance Corporation of India is actuarial valuation of gratuity liability and management of funds under the scheme. It is also stated that it was only after the Life Insurance Corporation of India received Ext.R3(D) letter 10.8.2011 from the review petitioner that it realised that though the review petitioner had sought conversion from Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme to Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme, it had not altered the ceiling limit on gratuity from `3,50,000/- to `10 lakhs, inspite of receiving and acknowledging Ext.R3(A) letter 25.3.2010 and that it was in such circumstances that Annexure-3 letter dated 19.8.2011 was sent demanding repayment of the sum of `.1,89,077/-. 6. I heard Sri.C.E.Unnikrishnan, learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner, Sri.P.N.Mohanan, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent writ petitioner, Smt.P.Maya, learned Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent and Smt.Prabha R.Menon, learned counsel appearing for the additional third respondent. I have also gone through the pleadings and the materials on record. The review petitioner retired from service on 31.3.2010. Immediately upon retirement he was paid `3,50,000/- by way of R.P. No.918 of 2011 -8- gratuity. Such payment was made from the sum of `5,39,077/- paid by the Life Insurance Corporation of India to the review petitioner society. W.P.(C) No.14016 of 2011 was filed on 23.5.2011 contending that though the employer society had received the sum of `5,39,077/from the Life Insurance Corporation of India, the employer society has paid only the sum of `3,50,000/- and that in the light of the decisions of this Court in **Retnavalli** v. A **mbalapadu Service Co-operative Bank Ltd.** (2005 (3) KLT 320) and **Nedupuzha Service Cooperative Bank Ltd.** v. **Rugmini** (2011 (3) KLT 134) he is entitled to receive the entire sum of `5,39,077/-. The Life Insurance Corporation of India was not a party to the writ petition. The review petitioner society did not dispute the fact that it had received the sum of `5,39,077/- from the Life Insurance Corporation of India. In short there was no contest to the claim made by the petitioner. It was in such circumstances, that by judgment delivered on 4.8.2011 this Court directed payment of balance amount of `1,89,077/-. 7. As per resolution No.152 dated 29.10.2009 the Managing Committee of the review petitioner society had resolved as follows: 152: ഗ��റ�വ�റ� പര�ധ� 3.5 ലക� ര�പയ�ല ന�ന�� 10 ലക� ര�പയ�യ� ഉയര�� ശ�പള കമ�ഷന ശ�പ�രശ സമര#�ചട�ള സ�ഹചര)��ല ഈ ബ�ങ�ലല ജ/വനക�ര�ല1 ഗ��റ�വ�റ� പര�ധ� 10 ലക� ര�പയ�യ� ഉയര�� ന�ശയ�ച�. ഗ��#4 ഗ��റ�വ�റ� ഇനഷ�റനസ4 കകക�ര)� ലചയ�ന എല ഐ സ�ലയ ആവശ)മ�യ ന1പ1� സ</കര�ക �നത�ന�യ� ഇക�ര)� അറ�യ�ക�വ�ന�� സ�ശയ�ച�. Later by resolution No.184 dated 17.12.2009 the Managing Committee R.P. No.918 of 2011 -9- resolved as follows: _184: Group Gratuity Insurance: We request the LIC to convert our master policy GGPE/45825 to a new GGCA Scheme without delay._ 8. Pursuant to that decision Annexure-2 letter dated 19.12.2009 was sent by the Secretary of the review petitioner society to the Life Insurance Corporation of India. After that letter was sent, the first ever communication received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India is Ext.R3(A) letter dated 25.3.2010. Since the full text of Ext.R3 (A) was not available, the learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner was asked to produce a copy thereof. The learned counsel made available a copy thereof and the same is extracted below. _“LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Pension and Group Schemes Department Ernakulam Divisional Office P&GS Dept., 4[th] Floor, “JEEVAN PRAKASH” MG ROAD, ERNAKULAM Pin Code-682011_ _Ref: P&GS/501946/45825 Date:25/03/2010 Version:8.02.0/0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------Phone No:0484 2362261 Email: pngs.ernakulam@licindia.c_ _----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Mudakuzha Sc Bank Ltd THE SECRETARY NO.693 MUDUKUZHA P.O.,O KERALA 683546_ _Dear Sir/Madam, RE: Group Gratuity Scheme of Your Employees_ _-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1. Policy no. :45825 ARD :28/02/2010 2. MEMBERSHIP DATA_ R.P. No.918 of 2011 -10- ||_Number of Members_|_:13_| |---|---|---| ||_Average Age_|_:45.54_| ||_Average Monthly Salary_|_:18553.30_| ||_Average Past Service_|_:18.62_| |_3._|_VALUATION METHOD_|_:Projected Unit Credit Method_| |_4._|_ACTUARIAL ASSUMPTIONS_|| ||_Mortality Rate_|_:LIC(1994-96)ultimate_| ||_Withdrawal Rate_|_:1% to 3% depending on age_| ||_Discount rate_|_:8% p.a._| ||_Salary Escalation_|_:3%_| |_5._|_RESULTS OF VALUATION_|| ||_a. PV of Past Service Benefit_|_:22448363_| ||_b.Current Service Cost_|_:378990_| ||_c.Total Service Gratuity_|_:4343365_| ||_d.Accrued Gratuity_|_:3002252_| ||_e.LCSA_|_:1308122_| ||_f. LC Premium_|_:6365_| ||_g.Service Tax @ 10.3%_|_:656_| |_6._|_RECOMMENDED CONTRIBUTION_|_RATE_| ||_a. Fund Value as on Renewal Date_|_:1005246_| ||_b. Additional Contribution_|| ||_for existing fund_|_:1243117_| ||_c. Current Service Cost_|_:378990_| |_7_|_Total amount payable (Rs.)_|_:1629128_| ||_(6.b + 6.c + 5.f + 5.g)_|| |_8._|_Benefits Valued_|| |_Category_|_NRA_|_Gratuity Ceiling_|_Slab_|_Rate_|_LCSA Ceiling RTA TABLE_| |---|---|---|---|---|---| |_1_<br>|_58_|_1000000_|_99_|_15_|_175000 GG41_| |_----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------_|||||| _Please note that the contribution rate may change in future depending upon the experience of the scheme. It is necessary to carry out the Actuarial Valuation periodically. It may be noted that the above results are as per the Actuarial Valuation which is based upon certain assumptions about future experience of the scheme. Further, the results are particularly sensitive to the difference between assumed valuation rate of discount and the assumed rate of escalation in salary. The valuation is done on the basis of members data._ 9. In the meanwhile, the Board of Directors of the review petitioner society that met on 16.2.2010 resolved as per resolution No.257-10 as follows: - “ഗ��പ4 ഗ��റ�വ�റ�: : ഗ��പ4 ഗ��റ�വ�റ� മ�സര പപ�ള�സ� ന�പര 45825ല R.P. No.918 of 2011 -11- ഉളല#ട�ട�ള ഈ ബ�ങ�ലല ഒര� ജ/വനക�രന ഗശ/. N.M പസ�ളമന 31.3.2010ല റ�ടയര ലചയ �ന�. അപCഹ��ന4 അന �വദ�ക�വ�ന ഗ��റ�വ�റ� എഗതയ�� പവ�� അന�വദ�ക�വ�ന ന1പ1� ഉണ�കണലമന4 എല ഐ സ� പയ�14 അഭ)രH�ക�വ�ന ന�ശയ�ച�.” Thereupon the Secretary of the review petitioner society sent a letter dated 5.3.2010 to the Life Insurance Corporation of India. The letter reads as follows: “Sub: Master policy No.GGPE 45825 - Regarding With regard to the above policy we would like to inform you that the retirement date of Sri.N.M.Solaman, Secretary (licid/emp No.1001/183) is 31.3.2010. A resolution of the board of directors with regard to the above is enclosed. Kindly make arrangements to disburse the retirement gratuity payable to him as early as possible”. 10. Along with that letter a copy of resolution No.257-10 dated 16.2.2010 was enclosed. The Life Insurance Corporation of India in turn sent Ext.P2 letter dated 29.3.2010 enclosing with it a cheque for `5,39,077/- for payment of gratuity to the writ petitioner. It is not in dispute that as on that date, the review petitioner society had not received Ext.R3(A) letter dated 25.3.2010. The original of that letter in the files of the bank discloses that it was received only on 5.4.2010. As per that letter the Life Insurance Corporation of India had informed the review petitioner society that the total amount payable by it by way of premium, service tax, additional contribution to existing fund and current service cost etc. is `16,29,128/-. In that letter it was also stated that the ceiling on gratuity will be `10 lakhs. The review petitioner society did not respond to the said letter. Neither the review R.P. No.918 of 2011 -12- petitioner nor the Life Insurance Corporation of India has a case that the review petitioner society had paid the sum of `16,29,128/- in terms of Ext.R3(A) letter dated 25.3.2010. During the next year, the contribution demanded was `12,24,837/- as can be seen from Ext.R3 (C) letter dated 16.2.2011. The original of that letter in the files maintained by the review petitioner society discloses that it was received on 22.2.2011 and in that letter the ceiling on gratuity was stipulated as `3,50,000/-. It was thereafter that the instant writ petition was filed on 23.5.2011 and was disposed of by judgment delivered on 4.8.2011. The review petitioner society thereupon sent Ext.R3(D) letter dated 10.8.2011 to the Life Insurance Corporation of India contending that though it had received from the Life Insurance Corporation of India the sum of `5,39,077/- towards payment of gratuity to the writ petitioner, the ceiling on gratuity as per the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme is only `3,50,000/-. The Life Insurance Corporation of India thereupon sent Annexure-3 letter dated 19.8.2011 calling upon the review petitioner society to repay the excess sum of Rs.1,89,77 paid by it. The review petitioner society thereupon sent a letter dated 5.9.2011 informing the Life Insurance Corporation of India that the employee had filed W.P.(C) No.14016 of 2011 in this Court demanding payment of the sum of `1,89,077/- and it was allowed by judgment delivered on 4.8.2011. The Life Insurance R.P. No.918 of 2011 -13- Corporation of India thereupon sent Annexure-4 letter dated 16.9.2011 stating that a cheque for `5,39,077/- was sent on the basis of the request in the letter dated 5.3.2010 and the resolution dated 3.3.2010 by which the society had resolved to request the Life Insurance Corporation of India to allow eligible gratuity to the writ petitioner, that the amount of gratuity was arrived at on the basis of his salary at `37,376/- as on the renewal date namely 28.2.2010 and that after the policy was renewed on 28.2.2010, the Life Insurance Corporation of India was informed that consent had been given only for conversion to Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme and not for enhancing the ceiling on gratuity to `10 lakhs and thereupon, the actuarial valuation as on 28.2.2010 was taken after reducing the ceiling on gratuity to `3,50,000/-. 11. It is evident from the materials on record that though by resolution No.152 dated 29.10.2009, the Board of Directors of the review petitioner society had resolved to raise the ceiling on gratuity to `10 lakhs and to request the Life Insurance Corporation of India to take necessary steps in that regard, and the Board of Directors had as per resolution No.184 dated 17.12.2009 resolved to request the Life Insurance Corporation of India to switch over to the Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme without delay, the review petitioner society did not pay the enhanced premium which was demanded in Ext.R3(A) R.P. No.918 of 2011 -14- letter dated 25.3.2010. It is also evident from the materials on record that during the next year 2011-12 also the ceiling on gratuity was brought back to `3,50,000/- in view of the non-payment of enhanced premium by the review petitioner society. The materials on record disclose that though the review petitioner society had decided to raise the ceiling on gratuity from `3,50,000/- to `10 lakhs that decision was not given effect to by paying additional premium. The writ petitioner has no case that having regard to the premium that was being paid when he was in service, the Life Insurance Corporation of India was bound to pay the sum of `10 lakhs. His case is that the Life Insurance Corporation of India had paid over the sum of `.5,39,077/- to the review petitioner, but the sum of `3,50,000/- alone was disbursed to him and therefore the balance amount should also be paid to him by the review petitioner society. From the materials on record it has to be necessarily held that the ceiling on gratuity was not enhanced from `3,50,000/- to `10 lakhs at any point of time. If that be so the mere fact that even before a demand for enhanced premium was raised, the Life Insurance Corporation of India had sent a cheque for `5,39,077/to the review petitioner society for payment of gratuity to the writ petitioner, cannot be a reason to hold that the entire amount should have been paid to him. The pleadings and the materials on record make it evident that the Life Insurance Corporation of India mistakenly R.P. No.918 of 2011 -15- made the payment of `5,39,077/- instead of paying only the sum of `3,50,000/-. The writ petitioner has no case in the writ petition that under the Group Gratuity Pure Endowment Scheme or Group Gratuity Cash Accumulation Scheme he was entitled to gratuity in excess of `3,50,000/-. His only case in the writ petition is that upon retirement the Life Insurance Corporation of India paid over `5,39,077/- as gratuity and therefore the society ought to have paid over the entire amount to him. In such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the judgment delivered on 4.8.2011 directing the review petitioner to pay the balance amount of `1,89,077/- to the writ petitioner is liable to be reviewed and recalled. I accordingly allow the review petition and recall the judgment delivered on 4.8.2011 in WP(C) No.14016 of 2011. Registry is directed to post the writ petition for hearing as per roster. The writ petitioner shall take steps to implead the Life Insurance Corporation of India as a party to the writ petition. Sd/- **P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE.** Rkc // true copy// PA to Judge