Allowed

V.Suresh v. Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation

Kerala HC2 Nov 2021WP(C)/22741/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition addressed the non-payment of gratuity and leave surrender amounts to retired petitioners. The Court observed that the liability was not disputed but delays were unjustified, ordering the respondents to quantify dues within one month and disburse them with interest.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to quantify the amounts due to petitioners within one month and release them with interest.

V.Suresh Vs Kerala Small Industries… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 11TH KARTHIKA, 1943 WP(C) NO. 22741 OF 2020

¶5

PETITIONERS:

¶6

1 V.SURESH AGED 59 YEARS MANAGER ACCOUNTS (RETIRED), MIDHILA, MANALOOR, NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-PIN-695 121.

¶7

2 R. SOMANANDHAN ACHARI, ATTERI HOUSE, CHERUSSERY, THAIKKATTUSSERY P.O, THRISSUR-680 306

¶8

BY ADVS. AYSHA YOUSEFF SMT.MOLLY JACOB SRI.JOBI.A.THAMPI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001

¶11

2 THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001

¶12

BY ADV. SRI. BIJU G., SC, SIDCO

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WPC NO.22741 OF 2020

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 02^nd day of November, 2021

¶18

The writ petitioners have approached this Court lamenting that, on retirement, they were paid only some amount by way of gratuity, as well as leave surrender, sanctioned under Ext.P1 proceedings. They were not granted the remaining amounts due

¶19

to them. Hence, they submitted Ext.P6 to Ext.P8 representations requesting to release the amounts due to them towards gratuity and leave surrender salary. The respondents have filed a detailed counter affidavit and reply affidavit has also been filed.

¶20

Essentially, from the pleadings it is clear

¶21

that the liability of the respondents to pay and the heads under which the amounts are to be released are not in serious dispute. It seems that the only claim is they are in extreme financial difficulties and

¶22

¶23

WPC NO.22741 OF 2020

¶24

may require sometime to pay off the entire liabilities due to the petitioners.

¶25

After hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I feel that there is no justification in delaying the amounts payable to the employees, especially the pensioners. Hence, I am inclined to dispose of the Writ Petition with a direction to the respondents to quantify the entire amounts due to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and to communicate it to the petitioners. Thereupon, the entire amounts so found payable, including the statutory interest shall be released by the respondents to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of passing of the order fixing the liability.

¶26

WPC NO.22741 OF 2020

¶27

It is made clear that, if there is any

¶28

dispute regarding the amounts stated to be payable, or delay in the disbursement of the amounts as directed by this Court, the right of the petitioners to move this Court is reserved.

¶29

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

SUNIL THOMAS

JUDGE

SKP/02-11

WPC NO.22741 OF 2020

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22741/2020

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶38

EXHIBIT P1	PHOTOCOPY OF THE 2240/P.E.R (3) 20 24.9.2019 ISSUED SANCTIONING GRATU	PROCEEDINGS NO. 19/SIDCO DATED BY 2ND RESPONDENT ITY TO 1ST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2	PHOTOCOPY OF THE NO.8849/P.E.R(3) 21.3.2019 ISSUED SANCTIONING GRATU	PROCEEDINGS /2018/SIDCO DT. BY 2ND RESPONDENT ITY TO 2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3	PHOTO COPY OF THE (2)/6689/2018 DAT 2ND RESPONDENT TO PERMITTING HIM TO LEAVE.	PROCEEDINGS NO. PER ED 3.2.2020 ISSUED BY 1ST PETITIONER SURRENDER HIS EARNED
EXHIBIT P4	PHOTOCOPY OF THE GENERAL/18-19 DAT 2ND RESPONDENT TO REGULARIZING THE	PROCEEDINGS NO. PER (1) ED 21.5.2019 ISSUED BY 1ST PETITIONER SUSPENSION PERIOD.
EXHIBIT P5	PHOTOCOPY OF THE (2)/542/2019 DATE 2ND RESPONDENT TO PERMITTING HIM TO LEAVE.	PROCEEDINGS NO. PER D 16.7.2019 ISSUED BY 2ND PETITIONER SURRENDER HIS EARNED
EXHIBIT P6	PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DA	REPRESENTATION 1ST PETITIONER TO THE TED 6.6.2020.
EXHIBIT P7	PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE 11.11.2019 BEFORE	REPRESENTATION 2ND PETITIONER DATED THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	PHOTOCOPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE 12.5.2020 BEFORE ALONG WITH THE PO CARD.	REPRESENTATION 2ND PETITIONER DATED THE 2ND RESPONDENT STAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

¶39

WPC NO.22741 OF 2020

¶40

¶41

EXHIBIT	P9	PHOTO COPY OF THE REPORT APPEARED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 13.11.2020.
EXHIBIT	P10	PHOTO COPY OF THE RANK LIST OF ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELECTRICAL) ON CONTRACT BASIS PUBLISHED ON 31.10.2020 CONSISTING OF THE NAMES OF 9 PERSONS.
EXHIBIT	P11	PHOTOCOPY OF THE RANK LIST OF ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CIVIL) ON CONTRACT BASIS PUBLISHED ON 31.10.2020 CONSISTING OF THE NAME OF 12 PERSONS.
EXHIBIT	P12	PHOTOCOPY OF THE RANK LIST OF 12 PERSONS TO THE POST OF TECHNICIAN ON CONTRACT BASIS PUBLISHED ON 31.10.2020.
EXHIBIT	P13	PHOTO COPY OF THE RANK LIST OF 129 PERSONS FOR APPOINTMENT TO THE POST OF SALES EXECUTIVE ON CONTRACT BASIS PUBLISHED ON 31.10.2020.
EXHIBIT	P14	PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. PER (1) /CONT/AEEGR/SIDCO/2020-2021 DATED 24.02.2020 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDE	NTS' EXH	IBITS:
ANNEXURE	R1(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.3810/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶42

TRUE COPY

¶43

P.A.TO JUDGE

V.Suresh v. Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Suresh v. Kerala Small Industries Development Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Musthafa T.T. Vs Abdul Sajeem S

Xavier Sixon P.M. Vs Kerala State Housing Board Represented by Its Secretary

Lenin. K.V. Vs Guruvayur Devaswom Managing Committee

C.N. Chinnammal Vs Vaikom Municipality

Shareekhath M. Vs State of Kerala

The Corporate Manager Vs State of Kerala