Allowed

T.Nagarajan, v. the Managing Director

Madras HC30 Jan 2017WP(MD)/1289/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation to pay the petitioner's unsettled retirement benefits in twelve equal monthly instalments starting March 2010, carrying 6% interest, with 18% interest applicable for delayed payments. The petitioner retains the right to challenge the computation.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay unsettled terminal benefits in twelve monthly instalments with 6% interest, reducible to 18% in case of delay.

T.Nagarajan, Vs the Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 30.01.2017

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.1289 of 2017

T.Nagarajan

... Petitioner

vs.

The Managing Director,

¶11

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd., Corporate Office, 23-2, Thoothukudi Road, Kattapomman Nagar, V.M.Chathiram, Tirunelveli – 627 011. 2. The General Manager

¶12

The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd., Nagercoil Region, Ranithottam, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents

¶13

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the retirement benefits with interest to the petitioner in view of the representation dated 27.12.2016.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Royce Immanuel For Respondents : Mr.K.Sathiya Singh

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The petitioner was employed as Special Record Clerk (MIS-II) Level - 6 the respondents Corporation and he retired from service on 31.07.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4.In these circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:-

¶20

¶21

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;

¶22

ii)The first instalment 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;

¶23

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;

¶24

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.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Assistant Registrar(CS-I)

¶27

/True Copy/

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

+1 cc to M/S.S.ROYCE IMMANUL, ADVOCATE SR.NO.4924

¶30

+1 CC TO M/S.K.SATHIYA SINGH, Advocate SR.No.4834

¶31

W.P(MD)No.1289 of 2017

¶32

30.01.2017

¶33

AE/MR-VB/09.02.2017:2P/3C

¶34

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

T.Nagarajan, v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Nagarajan, v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Selvaraj, (Sel.Gr.Asst-Rtd) Vs the Managing Director

T.Rajamani, Vs the Managing Director

P.Perumal Vs the Managing Director

Saravanan Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

Ismail, S/O.Syed Rowthar, Vs the Inspector of Police

G.Veluchamy Vs the Conservator of Forest