Disposed

R.Chandrasekaran v. State Express Transport

Madras HC9 Sept 2016WP(MD)/12331/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the respondent transport corporation to pay terminal benefits to a retired conductor in twelve equal monthly installments, carrying interest at 6% per annum, with an escalation to 18% in case of delay.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pay the amount due in 12 equal monthly installments commencing from 1st September, 2016, carrying interest at 6% per annum, or 18% in case

R.Chandrasekaran Vs State Express Transport — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :14.07.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

¶5

W.P(MD)No.12331 of 2016

R.Chandrasekaran

.. Petitioner

vs.

State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Limited,

¶10

Rep. By its Managing Director,Pallavan Salai Chennai.

¶11

.. Respondent

¶12

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pay all the terminal benefits payable to the petitioner including provident fund, Social Security Scheme Amount, Refund of Institute of Road Transport contribution amount, earned leave salary together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of his retirement to till the date of payment within the time that may be stipulated by this Court.

¶13

For Petitioner :Mr.A.Rahul For Respondent :Mr.K.Sathiya Singh

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner was employed as Conductor in the respondent transport corporation and he retired from service on 30.06.2016.

¶16

2.He has filed this writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to pay the retirement benefits.

¶17

3.When the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr.K.Sathiyasingh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the issue is covered by a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015 dated 12.06.2015. He has further submitted that the respondents would consider the request of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Honourable Division Bench.

¶18

4.For ready reference, the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD).Nos.383 to 457 of 2015 dated 12.06.2015 is extracted hereunder:

¶19

"The learned Additional Advocate General submits that he has obtained written instructions vide letter No.7945/E/2015-2 dated 11.06.2015 that the terminal benefits of the appellants would be settled through twelve equal monthly installments, carrying interest https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of 6% p.a.

¶20

2.The said statement is thus taken on record and the respondents will be bound by the same, we have to

¶21

¶22

keep in mind the judicial pronouncement of the Honourable Supreme Court in D.D.TEWARI (D) THR. LRS. Vs. UTTAR HARYANA BIJLI VITRAN NIGAM LTD & ORS {2014 (9) SCALE - 78}, wherein it is held that in case of any delay in making the payment of the installments, the interest payable would become 18% p.a., for the delayed period apart from any other remedy which may be available to the appellants for non-compliance of undertaking given to this Court.

¶23

3.The installments to be paid from July 2015 and each installment should be paid on or before 7th of each month”

¶24

5.Following the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court referred to above, the respondents are directed to pay the amount due to the petitioner in 12 equal monthly installments commencing from 1^st September, 2016. Further, if there are settlements or awards, the Corporation is obliged to take the same into account while arriving at the figure. It is needless to mention that the entire arrears shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum. In case of delay in making installments, the interest payable could be 18% for the delayed period.

¶25

6.The aforesaid direction to settle the terminal benefits would not preclude the workman to question the computation of any of the terminal benefits, if the same is paid lesser than the amount to which, he is entitled to receive. Likewise, if the petitioner has any grievance that he is entitled to interest for the amount already settled, he can agitate the same as per law, if he is entitled to.

¶26

7.The learned counsel for the respondents/Transport Corporation says that against certain employees, there are recoveries from them. So, the above payment may be made subject to recoveries, if any, from the employees. The petitioner is also agreeable for the same.

¶27

8.With the above direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

Assistant Registrar(AS)

¶30

/True Copy/

¶31

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶32

¶33

The Managing Director

¶34

State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Limited, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-2.

¶35

+One cc to Mr.A.Rahul, Advocate, SR.No.36890

¶36

+One cc to Mr.K.Sathiya Singh, Advocate, SR.No.36635

¶37

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ RR

¶38

RL/4C/2P/ARK/PV/22/7/2016

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.12331 of 2016 14/07/2016

R.Chandrasekaran v. State Express Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Chandrasekaran v. State Express Transport

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Subbiah, Vs the Commissioner

R. Krishnasamy Vs the Director of Treasureies

L. Jesu Antony, Vs the District Collector

The Correspondent, Vs the State of Tamilnadu

Nadar Higher Secondary Vs the Secretary to Govt.

Nazima Begam Vs the State of Tamil Nadu