Allowed

S.Sekaran v. the Management of

Madras HC29 Jan 2020WP(MD)/1686/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus for payment of 18% interest on belated terminal benefits. The court, following precedents, awarded 6% interest, disallowing the respondents' request for monthly installments to prevent further prejudice to the retired employee.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay penal interest at 6% per annum on belated retirement benefits within three months; dismissal of request for installment payments.

S.Sekaran Vs the Management of — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(MD) No.1686 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 29.01.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶6

W.P.(MD) No.1686 of 2020

S.Sekaran

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Management of

Tamilnadu State Transport Corpn., (Kumbakonam) Ltd.,

¶12

Karaikudi Region,

¶13

Rep.by its General Manager,

¶14

Karaikudi.

¶15

2.The Administrator,

¶16

Tamilnadu State Transport Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam,

Anna Salai,

Chennai-2.

... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum, for the period of delay from 01.06.2018 to 20.09.2019 in paying the amounts paid towards the terminal and pension benefits of the petitioner namely EPF Employee's Contribution, Gratuity, Encashment of Earned Leaves and commutated Value of Pension, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court and without affecting his right to claim balance amounts towards those benefits.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arunachalam For R-1 : Mr.P.Balasubramanian Standing Counsel For R-2 : Mr.A.Swaminathan Standing Counsel

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶24

2.The petitioner's retirement benefits were settled belatedly on 21.09.2019 and in view of such belated settlement, the present writ petition has been filed seeking for interest on the belated https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ payment of the terminal benefits.

¶25

1/3

¶26

W.P.(MD) No.1686 of 2020

¶27

3.It is brought to the notice of this Court that in an identical cases, a batch of writ petitions entertained by this Court and directions have been issued to the respondents to pay the interest at the rate of 6% on the belated payment of the terminal benefits. This Court does not intend to deviate from the said procedure.

¶28

4.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that in view of the financial burden cast on the respondent Corporation, they may be permitted to pay the interest on the belated payment in a liberal monthly installments.

¶29

5.I am not in agreement with the said representation made. There was already a duty cast on the respondent Corporation to pay the terminal benefits on the date of retirement itself and the very fact that the belated disbursement of retirement benefit, had already put the retired employee to serious prejudice, entertaining the present request for disbursement of the interest on the belated payment in installments, could cause further prejudice to the retired employee.

¶30

6.In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the respondent Corporation to pay the penal interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the belated payment of the retirement benefits for the period from the date of the retirement, till the date of actual disbursement, as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31

7.With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶32

// True Copy //

¶33

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶34

¶35

To:-

¶36

1.The General Manager, The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corpn., (Kumbakonam) Ltd., Karaikudi Region, Karaikudi.

¶37

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

¶38

2/3

¶39

W.P.(MD) No.1686 of 2020

¶40

2.The Administrator,

¶41

Tamilnadu State Transport Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam,

¶42

Anna Salai,

¶43

Chennai-2.

¶44

+1 CC to Mr.P.BALASUBRAMANIAN, Advocate ( SR-3759[F] dated 29/01/2020 )

¶45

W.P.(MD) No.1686 of 2020 29.01.2020

¶46

VB(11.02.2020) 3P 4C

¶47

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

¶48

3/3

S.Sekaran v. the Management of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sekaran v. the Management of

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

D.Vijayakumar Vs the Managing Director

S.Sanjai Seenivasan Vs State Rep. by Its Secretary

S.Ganesan Vs the Chief Educational Officer

P.Sridhar Vs the Secretary to Govt.

T.Krishnamoorthy Vs the Management of

T.Garmel Vs the Management of