Allowed

R.Balakrishnan v. the Managing Director

Madras HC20 Feb 2017WP(MD)/2838/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bench of the Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition filed by a retired employee of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation seeking payment of retirement benefits. The court directed the corporation to settle the pending terminal benefits in twelve equal monthly instalments with 6% interest, and 18% interest for any delayed period.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus directing the payment of terminal benefits in twelve equal monthly instalments with 6% interest (18% for delay).

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

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.02.2017

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.2838 of 2017

¶7

R.Balakrishnan ... Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Limited, 37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore-641 043. ... Respondent

¶10

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Respondent to pay the retirement benefits with interest to the petitioner in view of the representation dated 01.02.2017.

¶11

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

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner was the employee as in the respondent Corporation and he retired from service on 31.05.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

i)A direction is issued to the transport corporation to settle the terminal benefits of the petitioner that are yet to be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ settled, in twelve equal monthly instalments;

¶18

¶19

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

¶20

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;

¶21

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.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar(P&A) /True copy/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

The Managing Director,

¶27

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore)limited, 37, Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore-641 043.

¶28

+1 cc to M/s.S.Royce Immaunel, Advocate in SR.No. 9288 +1 cc to M/s.K.Sathiya Singh, Advocate in SR.No. 9252

¶29

nbi

¶30

CSL/MR/SAR-II/06.03.2017 : 2P/4C

¶31

W.P(MD)No.2838 of 2017

¶32

20.02.2017 (2/7)

¶33

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

R.Balakrishnan v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Balakrishnan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.Samdurai Vs the Principal Secretary to

A.Amutha Vs the Principal Accountant

C.Noble, S/O Chellayyan, Vs the District Collector

K.Natarajan Vs the Management Director

T.Veerapandian, Vs the Management of

M.Ayyadurai Vs the General Manager