Dismissed

R.Thangaraj v. R.Rengarajan

Madras HC20 Feb 2018CONT P(MD)/340/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged non-payment of retirement benefits via writ petition. A contempt petition was filed for willful disobedience of the earlier order. Respondents submitted partial payment was made and undertook to pay pending interest within two months. Court closed the contempt petition with liberty to revive if non-compliance occurred.

What did the court decide?

Petition closed with liberty to revoke in event of non-compliance of respondents' undertaking to pay interest within two months.

R.Thangaraj Vs R.Rengarajan — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 20.02.2018 CORAM THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA Contempt Petition (MD) No.340 of 2016 in W.P.(MD)No.21536 of 2015

¶3

R.Thangaraj ..Petitioner/Petitioner Vs.

¶4

1.R.Rengarajan, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, Kumbakonam.

¶5

2.A.Dharmaraj, The General Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., Karaikudi Region, Kariakudi. .. Contemnors/Respondents

¶6

PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to commit and punish the respondents for their willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.21536 of 2015 dated 04.01.2016.

¶7

Prayer in WP(MD). 21536/ 2015 :

¶8

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay all the retirement benefits of the petitioner including Gratuity, the Commuted Value of Pension, Earned Leave Salary , Refund of Institute of Road Transport Contribution amount, Surrender and Encashment of Unearned Leave Salary on Private Affairs for 90 days with enhanced dearness allowance at the rate 107% in terms of G.O.(Ms) NO. 245 Finance (Allowances) Department dated 10.10.2014 together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of his retirement to till the date of settlement within time that may be stipulated by the Court, and further directing the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum for the belated payment of provident fund and social security scheme arrears within a time limit.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rahul

¶10

For R1 : Mr.D.Sivaraman

¶11

For R2 : MR.A.P.Muthu Pandian

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The Contempt Petition has been filed to commit and punish the respondents for their willful disobedience of the order passed by https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ this Court in W.P.(MD)No.21536 of 2015, dated 04.01.2016.

¶14

¶15

2.Heard Mr.A.Rahul, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned standing counsel for the 1^st respondent and Mr.A.P.Muthupandian, learned standing counsel for the 2^nd respondent.

¶16

3.The learned counsel for the contemnors would submit that part of the amount has already been paid to the petitioner and they undertake to pay the interest on commutation and other amounts due to the petitioner, if any, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. In case of non-compliance, the petitioner can revive the contempt application.

¶17

4.Recording the above submission, this contempt petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to revive the contempt petition, in the event of non-compliance.

¶18

Sd/

¶19

Assistant Registrar (CS-III)

¶20

/True copy/

¶21

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

Contempt Petition (MD) No.340 of 2016

¶23

20.02.2018

¶24

+1cc to Mr.A.RAHUL, Advocate, SR.No. 50090

¶25

+1cc to Mr.D.Sivaraman, Advocate, SR.No. 50063

¶26

rj2

¶27

KK/SKN RSK/26.03.2018/SAR-2/2P-3C

¶28

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

R.Thangaraj v. R.Rengarajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Thangaraj v. R.Rengarajan

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

Seemaisamy Vs Mr.R.Rengarajan

S.Palsamy Vs Mr.K.Chellamuthu

K.Subramanian, Vs Mr.Rengarajan

M/S New India Assurance Vs T. Vijaya

A.Senthil Kumar Vs Rengaraj

Balakrishnan Vs Pandi