This judgment concerns the closure of a contempt petition filed by the petitioner against respondents for allegedly disobeying the order in W.P.(MD) No. 27055 of 2019. The petitioner appeared and confirmed that the direction to pay interest on belated gratuity and other benefits had been complied with.
The contempt petition is closed and disposed of.
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.
Cont. P.(MD)No.654 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 04.01.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
Cont. P.(MD)No.654 of 2021
A. Balakrishnan ...Petitioner/Petitioner
Vs
The Administrator,
The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar House,
Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. ... Contemnors/Respondents
Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Court Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for having willfully and deliberately disobeyed the orders of this court passed in W.P.(MD) No.27055 of 2019 dated 19.12.2019 and for having committed contempt of court and to pass orders.
Prayer in WP(MD). 27055/ 2019 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court Directing the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum to the petitioner from the belated payment of Gratuity, Provident Fund, Pension Commutation and Leave Salary from the date of retirement to the date of actual payment.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Ramya For Respondents : Mr.J.Senthil Kumaraiah, Standing Counsel
ORDER
Mr. D. Ramya, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner states that direction in order dated 19.12.2019 has been complied with.
1/2
Cont. P.(MD)No.654 of 2021
Assistant Registrar (Records)
// True Copy //
/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
mnr
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.
To
Cont. P.(MD)No.654 of 2021 04.01.2022
RK(19/01/2021) 2P 3C
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be allowed or dismissed.
Whether the results in the original petition are true.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
A. Balakrishnan
M. A. Murugesan
Bama
Anita Sumanth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
