Disposed

E.Anandhan v. the Managing Director

Madras HC23 Aug 2017WP(MD)/15847/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

By consent, the Court disposed of a writ petition seeking retirement benefits. Relying on a prior judgment in similar cases, the Court directed the Transport Corporation to disburse Provident Fund, Gratuity, Leave Salary, and other benefits in 12 equal monthly installments with 6% interest. Disposition is final.

What did the court decide?

Direction to disburse retirement benefits (PF, Gratuity, Leave Salary, etc.) in 12 equal monthly installments with 6% interest starting first week of October 2017.

E.Anandhan Vs the Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.08.2017

¶3

CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No.15847 of 2017

¶4

E.Anandhan : Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd, New Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District – 612 001.

¶7

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd, Karaikudi Region, Marthupathi Complex, Kovilur Road, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. : Respondents

¶8

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to disburse the petitioner's retirement benefits with interest namely Provident Fund, Gratuity, Leave Salary and other Retirement benefit.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gokul For Respondents : Mr.D.Sivaraman, Standing Counsel for TNSTC

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

By consent of both sides, this writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.

¶13

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a retired Assistant Manager from service with effect from 31.01.2017. The grievance of the petitioner appears to be that the respondents have not settled the retirement benefits, namely, Provident Fund, Gratuity, Leave Salary, and all https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ other attendant benefits. Finding no response, the petitioner has given a representation to the respondents on 05.08.2017, to pay the entire terminal benefits with interest from the date of his

¶14

¶15

retirement. However, the same has not been considered. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.

¶16

4.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents, sought four weeks to consider the representation of the petitioner.

¶17

The issue relating to the payment of retirement benefits by the Transport Corporation is no more res integra. The first Bench in W.A.(MD) Nos.383 to 457 of 2015, keeping in mind the retirement benefits having not been disbursed by the Transport Corporation, has given 12 equal monthly installments to clear all the retirement benefits with interest at 6%.

¶18

6.In the light of the order passed by this Court in the writ appeal cited supra, the respondents are hereby directed to disburse the retirement benefits of the petitioner with 12 equal monthly installments and the first of such installment shall commence from the first week of October 2017.

¶19

7.The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above direction. No costs.

¶20

Sd/Assistant Registrar(AE) /True Copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

¶23

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd, New Railway Station Road, Kumbakonam, Thanjavur District – 612 001.

¶24

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd, Karaikudi Region, Marthupathi Complex, Kovilur Road, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District.

¶25

+1cc to M/S.K.Gokul, Advocate SR.No. 74143 +1cc to M/S.D.Sivaraman, Advocate SR.No. 74048

¶26

W.P.(MD)No.15847 of 2017 23.08.2017

¶27

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

¶28

JM/SV MMS/SAR 1/11.10.2017/2P/5C

E.Anandhan v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.Anandhan 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.Nanthini Vs the Chairman

P.Anandh Vs the Chairman

Mahalakshmi Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

G.Santhini, D/O.Gurusamy Vs the Director

Animal Care Trust, Vs the Regional Transport Officer

P.Suriya Prabha Vs the District General of Police