Dismissed

M.Packiyam, v. the Managing Director

Madras HC20 Jan 2017WP(MD)/994/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge court disposed of a writ petition filed by a retired driver of TNSRTC seeking terminal benefits. It directed the corporation to pay the benefits in twelve equal monthly instalments starting March 2017 with 6% interest, escalating to 18% for delays.

What did the court decide?

Directed the corporation to pay terminal benefits in 12 equal monthly instalments with 6% interest and 18% for delays.

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

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 20.01.2017

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No. 994 of 2017

M.Packiyam

... Petitioner

vs.

The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation ( Madurai) Limited, Bye Pass Road, Madurai – 625 016. ... Respondent

¶11

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay Gratuity with 18% interest per annum to the petitioner within a stipulated period.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.G. Venkataraman For Respondent No.1 : Mr.A. Jeyaram

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The petitioner was employed as Special Grade Driver in the respondent Corporation and he retired from service on 31.05.2013 on attaining the age of superannuation.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

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;

¶19

¶20

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;

¶21

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;

¶22

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.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

Assistant Registrar (CO)

¶25

/True Copy/

¶26

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶27

nbi

¶28

¶29

The Managing Director,

¶30

The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation ( Madurai) Limited, Bye Pass Road, Madurai – 625 016.

¶31

+1 cc to M/s.G. Venkataraman, Advocate in SR.No.3500

¶32

GJM/MR/VB/7.2.17-2p-3C

¶33

W.P(MD)No.994 of 2017 20.02.2017(7/7)

¶34

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

M.Packiyam, v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Packiyam, 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Sri Balaji Traders Vs the Commercial Tax OFFICER-1

M/S.Sj Computers, Vs the Deputy Commercial Tax

S.Gopal, Special Grade Driver Vs the Tamil Nadu State

C.Krishnan Vs the Managing Director

D.Saravanan Vs the Superintending Engineer

V. Muthuchamy Vs the Managing Director