Disposed

K.Purushothaman v. The Managing Director

Madras HC4 Apr 2022WP/352/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court, without expressing an opinion on merits or going into the case's details, directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representations regarding differential gratuity, commutation, and leave amounts. This was to be done expeditiously within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders within twelve weeks.

K.Purushothaman Vs The Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 04.04.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

W.P.NO.352 OF 2022

K.Purushothaman

... Petitioner

.Vs.

The Managing Director,

¶10

The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Vazhuthareddy Post, Salamedu, Villupuram – 605 602.

¶11

The General Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Kancheepuram Region, Kancheepuram.

¶12

The Administrator,

¶13

The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Employees Post Retirement Welfare Fund Scheme, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER:-

¶15

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to settle the differential of Gratuity, Commutation, Leave Surrender(Earned Leave and Old Medical Leave amount, Social Welfare Fund and RBS pension along with interest at the rate of 18% within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr.J.Pradeep For Respondents : Mr.G.Saravana Kumar Standing Counsel

¶17

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

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The relief sought for in the writ petition is to direct the respondents to pay the difference of Gratuity and difference of Commutation and leave liability amount along with interest at the rate of 18% within the stipulated time as fixed by this Court.

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners joined the services in the respondentCorporation in the year 1990 and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2016. At the time of retirement, the petitioner served as Superintendent attached to the Accounts Section (Ticket Section, Orikkai) of the 2^nd respondent Corporation.

¶21

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to receive the differential Gratuity amount and differential commutation amount, Leave Surrender and Social Welfare Fund. In this regard, the petitioner has made several representation and finally on 04.12.2021. The said representation is still pending, hence the present writ petition.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it would suffice to issue direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 04.12.2021 submitted by the petitioner within a time as stipulated by this Court for which, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent- Corporation has reported no objection.

¶23

Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels on either side and in view of the limited prayer sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without expressing any opinion and without going into merits of the case, is inclined to direct the 1^st respondent to consider the representations made by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶24

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

¶25

With the above directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶26

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CCC)

¶27

//True Copy//

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

ak To 1. The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Vazhuthareddy Post, Salamedu, Villupuram – 605 602.

¶30

1. The General Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Kancheepuram Region, Kancheepuram.

¶31

1. The Administrator, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Employees Post Retirement Welfare Fund Scheme, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶32

+1cc to Mr.J.Pradeep, Advocate, S.R.No.23531 +1cc to Mr.G.Saravana Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.22932

¶33

W.P.NO.352 OF 2022

¶34

SSV(CO) PBS/02/05/2022

¶35

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

K.Purushothaman v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Purushothaman 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Paramasivam Vs Additional Secretary to Government

S.a.Thameem Vs The Commissioner of Police

N.Jayakumar Vs Om Prakash Meena

V.Rajaram Vs the Secretary

M.Muthukumar Vs The State of TamilNadu

P.Selvaraj Vs The Director