Writ petition seeking mandamus to release terminal benefits of late employee to petitioner as legal heir was dismissed. Court noted third respondent issued cheques for some dues and sought disbursement for others via LIC.
Writ of Mandamus was dismissed; no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.11.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.18724 of 2019
Rajammal ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 05.
2.The Regional Director of Municipal Administration,
J.G.Nagar, 1 st Street,
Kumaranandhapuram,
Tirupur.
3.The Municipality Commissioner,
Municipality Office,
Puliyampatti,
Tirupur District.
4.Murugayyal ... Respondents
Prayer:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to release the terminal benefits of petitioner's son late Arumugam the permanent employee of the 3rd respondents to the petitioner herein being the sole surviving legal heir.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Roshan Atiq
For Respondents: Mr.R.S.Selvam for R1 and R2
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to release the terminal benefits of petitioner's son late Arumugam the permanent employee of the third respondent to the petitioner being the sole surviving legal heir.
1
2.Heard the arguments advanced on either side.
3.For non-settling of the terminal benefits due to the petitioner's husband, the present writ petition has been filed.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent produced a copy of the letter dated 22.10.2019 from the third respondent addressed to the second respondent, wherein it is stated that the following amounts were settled in favour of the petitioner by way of cheques:
'(i) a sum of Rs.13,008/- towards earned leave and a sum of Rs.70,950/- towards un-earned leave (cheque bearing no.285093 dated 06.07.2019 drawn from the Bharatha State Bank, Punsei Puliampatti);
(ii) a sum of Rs.91,370/- towards provident fund (cheque bearing no.248037 dated 07.06.2019 drawn from the Bharatha State Bank, Sathyamangalam); and
(iii) a sum of Rs.37,451/- towards the interest for provident fund (cheque bearing no.248055 dated 29.06.2019 drawn from the Bharatha State Bank, Sathyamangalam).'
5.The learned counsel appearing for the third respondent would submit that with regard to the payment from LIC, the third respondent has already sent letter to the Manager of LIC for disbursement of the amount and would further submit that if there is any due pending with the third respondent, it will be settled in accordance with law, as pointed out by the petitioner.
6.In view of the above, nothing survives for adjudication in the writ petition and the writ petition is dismissed. However, if there is any due, the petitioner can work out the remedy in the manner known to law.
7.The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Sd/Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
pri
To
1.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Chepauk,
Chennai – 05.
2
W.P.No.18724 of 2019
PVS(CO)
CB(06/12/2019)
3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition seeking release of terminal benefits to the petitioner survives adjudication in view of the letters sent by the third respondent settling dues via cheques and communicating w
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rajammal
The Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Chepauk
The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, J.G.Nagar
The Municipality Commissioner, Puliyampatti
Murugayyal
M.Dhandapani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
