Disposed

S.Murugan v. the Management of

Madras HC23 Jan 2017WP(MD)/1000/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench disposed of a writ petition seeking terminal benefits for a retired transport driver. The court directed the corporation to settle dues in twelve monthly instalments from March 2017, carrying 6% interest, with 18% interest applicable for delayed payments. The order allows the petitioner to challenge future computations of benefits.

What did the court decide?

Settlement of terminal benefits in twelve monthly instalments commencing March 10, 2017, with 6% interest and 18% interest for delays permitted.

S.Murugan Vs the Management of — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 23.01.2017

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.1000 of 2017

S.Murugan

... Petitioner

vs.

1. The Management of

Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation(Thirunelveli) Ltd., Thirunelveli Region, Rep. by its Managing Director, Thirunelveli.

¶12

The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Anna Salai, Chennai – 2. ... Respondents

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1^st respondent to pay the petitioner Rs.3,06,241/towards Gratuity, Rs.3,49,581/towards E.P.F.Employee's Contributions and Rs.2,39,898/- towards Leave Salary, together with 18% interest per annum and further to direct the respondents to pay him arrears of pension for the period from 01.04.2015 by revising his pension, together with 18% interest per annum, after calculating all his terminal/pension benefits based on the monthly wages payable to him on the month of his retirement i.e., March 2015 by revising the same as per the settlement, dated 13.04.2015, as ordered by the Honourable Division Bench of this Court in its order, dated 29.01.2016 in W.A.(MD).No.1457/2015 and etc., batch.

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arunachalam For Respondents : Mr.K.Sathiya Singh for R1 Mr. A.P.Muthupandian for R2

¶16

ORDER

¶17

The petitioner was employed as Selection Grade Driver in the respondents Corporation and he retired from service on 31.03.2015 on attaining the age of superannuation.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

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

¶21

3.The First Bench of this Court in similar matter has passed an order dated 12.06.2015 in W.A.(MD) Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, issuing direction to the transport Corporations to settle the terminal benefits of its employees in equal monthly instalments and to pay 6% interest on the terminal benefits payable to the workman. The Bench has also held that workman is entitled to 18% interest for the defaulted period of instalment.

¶22

4.In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶23

i)A direction is issued to the transport corporation to settle the terminal benefits of the petitioner that are yet to be settled, in twelve equal monthly instalments;

¶24

ii)The first installment shall commence by making payment on or before the 10^th March 2017 and the amount in each of the remaining instalments shall be paid on or before 10^th of every succeeding month;

¶25

iii) The said terminal amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum, as per the Division Bench judgment referred to above. In case of delay in making instalments, the interest payable could be 18% for the delayed period;

¶26

iv)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. No costs. Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(Crl.side)

¶28

/True copy/

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

¶31

The Managing Director, Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation(Thirunelveli) Ltd., Thirunelveli Region,Thirunelveli.

¶32

+1cc to MR.S.Arunachalam, Advocate SR.No.4348

¶33

+1cc to Mr.K.Sathiyasingh, Advocate SR.No.3615

¶34

vsn

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ sm:RR-BS:03/02/2017:2P/4C

¶36

W.P(MD)No.1000 of 2017 23.01.2017

S.Murugan v. the Management of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Murugan v. the Management of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S. Arockia Selvi Vs the Senior Regional Manager

G.Gunasekarn, S/O.Govindan Vs the Tamilnadu State

S.Murugananda Bharathi, Vs Chairman -Cum-Managing

A.Chandra Vs the Executive Engineer

M.Thangapandi, Vs Union of India, Rep. by Secy.

V.S.Ramaiah, Vs the Principal Secretary