Allowed

Hentry Justin v. the Managing Director

Madras HC4 Jan 2018WP(MD)/20107/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court issued a writ of mandamus directing the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation to settle the petitioner's un-settled terminal retirement benefits in 12 monthly installments with 6% interest and 18% interest on delays.

What did the court decide?

Direction to settle terminal benefits in 12 monthly installments with 6% interest and 18% interest on delays.

Hentry Justin Vs the Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.10.2016

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE Dr.JUSTICE S.VIMALA

¶6

W.P(MD)No.20107 of 2016

Hentry Justin

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Tirunelveli Limited, Tirunelveli – 627 003.

¶11

2.The General Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Tirunelveli Limited, Nagercoil Region, Ranithottam, Nagercoil – 1. Kanyakumari District.

¶12

3.The Managing Trustee Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondents

¶13

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to settle the petitioners retirement benefits including Gratuity leave salary Provident Fund Commuted Value of pension Dearness Allowance arrears and all other attendant retirement benefits etc. with interest at the rate of not less than 18% from the date of retirement namely 30.04.2016 and pay the same to the petitioner within the time frame to be fixed by this court.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.N.S.Ramakrishna Dass For Respondents : Mr.S.Sathiyasingh

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts. You can be young without money but you can gov.in/hcservices/ ’t be old without it. ..Tennessee Williams

¶17

¶18

This is the contention of the petiioner, while praying for payment of retirement benefits.

¶19

The petitioner was employed as Driving Inspector in the respondent corporation and he retired from service on 30.04.2016 on reaching the age of superannuation.

¶20

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

¶21

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 12 equal monthly installments 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 installments.

¶22

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

¶23

(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 installments.

¶24

(ii)The first installment shall commence by making payment on or before 1^st week of December, 2016 and the amount in each of the remaining installments shall be paid on or before 10^th of every succeeding month.

¶25

(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 installments, the interest payable could be 18% for the delayed period.

¶26

5.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.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

Assistant Registrar(CO)

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 1.The Managing Director,

¶32

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Tirunelveli Limited, Tirunelveli – 627 003.

¶33

¶34

2.The General Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Tirunelveli Limited, Nagercoil Region, Ranithottam, Nagercoil – 1. Kanyakumari District. 3.The Managing Trustee Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. +1 cc to M/s.K.Sathiya Singh, Advocate in SR.No.61751 +1 cc to M/s.N.S.Ramakrishna Dass, Advocate in SR.No.61511 mj CSL/SS-2/08.11.2016: 3P/6C

¶35

W.P(MD)No.20107 of 2016 19.10.2016

¶36

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

Hentry Justin v. the Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hentry Justin 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balasubramanian, M/48 Years Vs State Rep. by

R.Senthil Moorthy @ Vs L.S.Sathish Kumar.

Mohamed Akbar, M/A-73 Years Vs Sajia Fathima

C.Pathrose, S/O.Chelliyan, Vs the Managing Director

C.Mani Vs the Managing Director

Ttv Dhinakaran, Vs Assistant Director