High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeWrit petitions disposed with directions to cons...

Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 25121/2022, 25144/2022, 25163/2022, 25174/2022 and 25222/2022

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) Nos. 25121/2022; 25144/2022; 25163/2022; 25174/2022; 25222/2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • Devana Ramachandran
Judgment Date
2022-09-28
Court Decision / Holding
The petitions are disposed with directions: (a) petitioners may approach the concerned Banks with appropriate claims; if done within two weeks, the Banks’ competent Authority shall hear and decide the matter and issue an order not later than three months from the date of filing; (b) the Banks shall consider the influence of the binding precedents, especially Chandrasekharan Nair (supra), in the resultant order; (c) petitioners may pursue any other remedy thereafter, including under the Payment of Gratuity Act, with its outcome left undecided.
Final Disposition
Writ petitions disposed with directions to consider gratuity claims at the Society level, with timelines for action, while preserving the option of statutory remedies under the Payment of Gratuity Act

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • N.V. Balan
  • Narayanan Nair
  • Padmakshan E.
  • Narayanikutty M.C.
  • Shekara M.

Respondents

  • Joint Registrar (General), Co-operative Societies, Kasaragod-671323
  • Deputy Labour Commissioner, Gratuity Controlling Authority, Kasaragod-671323
  • Perumbala Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Perumbala, Kasaragod District-671317
  • Muliyar Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Kanathur, Kasaragod District-671542
  • Kadakam Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Kundamkuzhy, Kasaragod District-671322
  • Life Insurance Corporation of India Ltd. (LIC), represented by its Manager, Jeevan Jyothi, Kasaragod District-671121

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Kodoth Sreedharan
  • • Chackochen Vithayathil
  • • Jawahar Jose
  • • Abraham P. Meachinkara
  • • Parvathy K.
  • • S. Easwaran
  • • M. Sasindran

Counsels for Respondents

  • • S. Easwaran
  • • Parvathy K.
  • • M. Sasindran
  • • Abraham P. Meachinkara

Case Synopsis & Summary

The batch of writ petitions filed in the Kerala High Court challenge the denial of eligible gratuity to employees of various service cooperative banks after superannuation. The petitioners contend that the Societys cannot bar gratuity with an upper cap under the Payment of Gratuity Act, especially in light of binding precedents such as Chandrasekharan Nair v. Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. (Full Bench) which counsel for the petitioners rely upon to claim entitlement beyond the LIC Group Gratuity Scheme. The respondents argue maintainability issues, stating that the petitioners have not approached the respective Societies and that quantum would depend on Bye-laws and Regulations; they also point to the statutory remedy before the Gratuity Controlling Authority under the Act. The judge notes the petitions’ common issue—whether the Society can deny gratuity—and emphasizes that, ultimately, the Society must decide claims on the facts, documentary inputs, and prevailing precedents. The court directs a structured, time-bound approach: petitioners may file claims with the respective banks within two weeks; competent authorities shall hear and pass appropriate orders not later than three months from such applications, while considering the cited precedents. The liberty to pursue alternative remedies under the Payment of Gratuity Act remains open, and the matter is disposed with directions rather than final adjudication of entitlement.

Provisions of Law Cited

Payment of Gratuity Act

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Chandrasekharan Nair v. Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. (Full Bench) 2017(4)KLT276(FB) – binding precedent cited as influencing the approach to gratuity entitlement and the role of Bye-laws/Regulations in quantification

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that withholding gratuity by cooperative societies, particularly by applying an upper cap under the Payment of Gratuity Act, undermines statutory entitlements and contradicts the binding precedent set in Chandrasekharan Nair (Full Bench). They argue that the Society should determine the gratuity amounts in light of the governing Bye-laws and applicable schemes, including the LIC Group Gratuity Scheme, and that the authorities must not deny eligibility without a proper, law-based framework. They seek reliefs consistent with ensuring full gratuity entitlement, or at least a process to quantify based on evidence and legal norms; in any event, the remedy should be pursued within the statutory scheme rather than a blanket denial.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents contend that the petitions are not maintainable as petitioners bypass the Society level and approach the High Court directly; they argue that quantification depends on the Societies’ Bye-laws and Regulations, which may differ, and the relevant authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act or the Society’s own mechanisms should decide claims. They claim alternative statutory remedies exist and should be exhausted before resorting to writ petitions. They emphasize the need for factual assessment, documentary inputs, and the possible role of the LIC Group Gratuity Scheme only as a comparator, not as a universal entitlement. They urge restraint and insist on a structured process within the statutory framework.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Chandrasekharan Nair v. Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd.2017(4)KLT276(FB)PositiveCited as binding precedent guiding the approach to gratuity entitlement and quantification in this batch of petitions.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 25121/2022, 25144/2022, 25163/2022, 25174/2022 and 25222/2022 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN ``` ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA, 1944 ``` ``` WP(C) NO. 25121 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` N.V.BALAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY (RETIRED), PERUMBALA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PERUMBALA.P.O., KALANAD VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. S/O KUNHAMBU NAIR, SRUTHI NILAYAM, PERUMBALA.P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. ``` ``` BY ADVS. KODOTH SREEDHARAN CHACKOCHEN VITHAYATHIL ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KASARAGOD -671323. ``` - `2 THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, GRATUITY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KASARAGOD – 671323.` - `3 PERUMBALA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PERUMBALA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., PERUMBALA.P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT.- 671317. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.` ``` 4LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. (LIC), REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INC LTD., JEEVAN JYOTHI, M.G. ROAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT – 671121. ``` ``` BY ADVS SRI.ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA SMT.PARVATHY.K-GP SRI.S.EASWARAN – SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25144/2022, 25163/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 2 ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN`** ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA, 1944 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 25144 OF 2022`** ## **`PETITIONERS:`** - `1 NARAYANAN NAIR, RETIRED ACCOUNTANT, THE MULIYAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., P.O. KANTHALLUR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. S/O A.KUNHIRAMAN NAIR, R/AT RAMANILAYAM, 5TH MILE, P.O.KOLATHUR, CHENGALA VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.` ``` 2NARAYANAN.T., RETIRED SENIOR CLERK, MULIYAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KANATHUR. P.O. MULIYAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. S/O APPA.T., R/AT NOOVAMBAIR HOUSE, KOOTTOOR.P.O.,MULIYAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. ``` ``` BY ADV KODOTH SREEDHARAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES(GENERAL) CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KASARAGOD -671323, ``` - `2 THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER,GRATUITY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KASARAGOD – 671323.` ``` 3THE MULIYAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., KANATHUR. P.O. MULIYAR, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671542. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD (LIC), REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., JEEVAN JYOTHI, M.G. ROAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT – 671121. ``` ``` BY ADVS. JAWAHAR JOSE ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 3 ``` PARVATHY K – GP S.EASWARAN – SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25121/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 4 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 25163 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` PADMAKSHAN.E, SECRETARY (RETIRED), KADAKAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., MULLERIA P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT, S/O.KRISHNAN NAIR, SOUPARNIKA HOUSE, MOODAMKULAM, KARADKA P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT. ``` ``` BY ADV KODOTH SREEDHARAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE JOINT REGISTRAR(GENERAL) CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KASARAGOD - 671 323. 2THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, GRATUITY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KASARAGOD - 671 323. 3KADAKAM SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. KUNDAMKUZHY, KUNDAMKUZHY, P.O.KASARAGOD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. (LIC) REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., JEEVAN JYOTHI, M.G.ROAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671 121. BY ADVS. M.SASINDRAN ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA PARVATHY K – GP S.EASWARAN – SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25121/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 5 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 25174 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` NARAYANIKUTTY.M.C, SECRETARY (RETIRED), PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., MANJESHWARAM, UPPALA P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT, W/O.DAMODARAN, KAIRALI, KOTEKKANI ROAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. ``` ``` BY ADV KODOTH SREEDHARAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE JOINT REGISTRAR(GENERAL), CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES KASARAGOD-671323. ``` ``` 2THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, GRATUITY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KASARAGOD-671323. ``` ``` 3PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL & RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD., MANJESHWARAM, UPPALA P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671322, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. ``` ``` 4LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. (LIC), REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., JEEVAN JYOTHI, M.G.ROAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT-671121. ``` ``` BY ADVS ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA PARVATHY K – GP S.EASWARAN – SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25121/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 6 # **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** # **`PRESENT`** ``` THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28[TH] DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022 / 6TH ASWINA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 25222 OF 2022 ``` ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` SHEKARA M., SENIOR CLERK (RETIRED), MAJIBAIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., MAJIBAIL, MANJESHWAR VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. S/O KRISHNA BELCHADA, SOIPAKALLU HOUSE, MAJIBAIL.P.O., MANJESHWAR VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. ``` ``` BY ADV KODOTH SREEDHARAN ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** ``` 1THE JOINT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES, KASARAGOD – 671323. 2THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, GRATUITY CONTROLLING AUTHORITY, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY LABOUR COMMISSIONER, KASARAGOD – 671323. 3MAJIBAIL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD., MAJIBAIL, LANJESHWAR VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT - 671323. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. (LIC), REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., JEEVAN JYOTHI, M.G. ROAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT – 671121. ``` ``` BY ADVS ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA PARVATHY K – GP S.EASWARAN – SC ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.09.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).25121/2022 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 7 ## **`JUDGMENT`** The petitioners in these cases were employees of different Service Co-operative Banks and they say that they have been denied eligible Gratuity, consequent to their superannuation from service. 2. Sri.Kodoth Sridharan – learned counsel for the petitioners in all these cases, submitted that though the quantum claimed by his clients in each of these cases is different, the issue is same, namely, as to whether the Society can deny eligible gratuity, citing an upper cap under the Payment of Gratuity Act, in spite of the judgment of a learned Full Bench of this Court in Chandrasekharan Nair v. Kerala State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Ltd. [2017(4)KLT276(FB)]. He argued that the denial of eligible amounts to his clients is illegal and thus they are entitled to the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition. 3. In response, Sri.M.Sasindran – learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent in WP(C)No.25163/2022 and Sri.Jawahar Jose – learned counsel for the 3rd respondent in WPC 25121/22 & conn. 8 WP(C)No.25144/2022, argued that these Writ Petitions are not maintainable, since the petitioners have never approached their clients or any other Society, but have chosen to file these Writ Petitions directly. They argued that the quantification of the amount will depend upon various factors, including the Bye-laws and Regulations of the Societies; and hence that the action of the petitioners, in having approached this Court directly, is untenable. As an alternative submission, the learned counsel added that, in any event, the petitioners cannot maintain these Writ Petitions because they have an alternative statutory remedy before the Controlling Authority under the afore Act. rd 4. I notice from the files that summons issued to the 3 respondent in WP(C)No.25222/2022 has not been served. However, in view of the directions I propose herein, I do not think that this Court will be inhibited from delivering judgment, particularly when they will not be put to prejudice on account of the same. 5. When I consider and evaluate the afore submissions, it is limpid that, at the first instance, it is for the Society to decide the claims of the petitioners, particularly when it is edificed on WPC 25121/22 & conn. 9 certain binding precedents of this Court. That apart, the question whether the petitioners would be entitled to larger amount of gratuity than what has been offered by the Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) under the Group Insurance Scheme; or even if any such Group Gratuity Scheme is not available – as in the case of at least one Society in this batch – in what manner the Bye-laws and Regulations would come to play in quantification of the same. These issues will certainly have to be decided by the Society at the first instance – they being in the realm of facts, coupled with documentary inputs. In the afore circumstances, I order these Writ Petitions with the following directions. a) The petitioners will be at liberty to approach the concerned Banks with appropriate claims; and if this is done within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, same shall be considered by its competent Authority, after affording them an opportunity of being heard; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon as expeditiously as is possible but not later than three WPC 25121/22 & conn. 10 months from the date on which such applications are made. b) While the afore exercise is taken forward, the Society will certainly consider the impact of all precedents cited by the petitioners, especially Chandrasekharan Nair (supra), and their opinon on the same shall be reflected in the resultant order. c) The liberty of the petitioners to invoke any other alternative remedy thereafter, including under the Payment of Gratuity Act, is left open and their contentions in that regard are also left undecided. ``` RR ``` ``` Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 11 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25144/2022`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 ``` ``` Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17/12/2021 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 17/12/2021 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31/05/2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. ``` ``` Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 31/05/2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 12 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25163/2022`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15/12/2021 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06/07/2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 13 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25174/2022`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.4.2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.6.2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 14 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25222/2022`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25/01/2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06/07/2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. ``` WPC 25121/22 & conn. 15 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25121/2022`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04/02/2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.06.2022 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONER. ```