Disposed

N.Srinivasagan, v. Murugesan

Madras HC22 Oct 2021CONT P(MD)/562/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This contempt petition challenged non-compliance with a previous order directing payment of interest on pension and terminal benefits. The respondents filed a memo complying with the order, leading to closure of the petition, with instructions that disputes on calculation be challenged elsewhere.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed upon proof of compliance; petitioner to approach appropriate forum for calculation disputes.

N.Srinivasagan, Vs Murugesan — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Cont.P.(MD) No.562 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED :22.10.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR Cont.P.(MD) No.562 of 2021

¶6

N.Srinivasagan ... Petitioner/Petitioner Vs.

¶7

1.Thiru Murugesan, The Managing Director,

¶8

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.,

¶9

Madurai Region, Madurai.

¶10

2.Tmt. Bhama, The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondents

¶11

PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the contemnors/respondents for willfully disobeying and not complying with the order of this Hon'ble Court dated 27.11.2019 in W.P.(MD)No.25189 of 2019.

¶12

Prayer in WP(MD). 25189/ 2019 :

¶13

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to directing the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18 percentage per annum, for the period of delay from 1.6.18 TO 21.9.19 in paying the amounts paid towards the terminal and pension benefits of the petitioner namely EPF Employees contribution, Gratuity, Encashment of Earned/sick leaves and commutated value of pension, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arunachalam For Respondents : Mr.J.Senthil Kumaraiah, Standing Counsel.

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

The present Contempt Petition has been filed alleging non compliance of the order dated 27.11.2019 made in W.P.(MD)No.25189 of 2019.

¶17

The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the order passed by this Court has been complied with and he has filed a memo to that effect.

¶18

Recording the same, this Contempt Petition is closed. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the calculation made by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

1/2

¶20

Cont.P.(MD) No.562 of 2021

¶21

respondents, it is open to him to challenge the same before the appropriate forum.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar (Ad-I)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

vsm

¶27

Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.

¶28

¶29

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd., Madurai Region, Madurai. 2.The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶30

Cont.P.(MD) No.562 of 2021 22.10.2021 DJ(CO) KB(15.11.2021) 2P 3C

¶31

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

¶32

2/2

N.Srinivasagan, v. Murugesan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.Srinivasagan, v. Murugesan

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

Thilagam.T Vs Dist.Educational Officer

A.Krishnan Vs The Inspector General of Police (Registration)

Vinser Mencila.R Vs the State of Tamil Nadu

M.Chellavel, Vs M.A. Murugesan

P.M. Raju, Vs Murugesan

M.Thavamani, Vs Murugesan