Partly allowed

Thankaraj.S (Edp No. 4086) v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd.

Madras HC13 Jun 2022WP(MD)/11383/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought interest on belated pension benefits. Court referred to a prior order mandating 6% interest. Noting revenue impact and lack of opposition, Court directed respondents to pay 6% interest on belated retirement benefits within three months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondents to pay interest at 6% per annum on belated retirement benefits within three months.

Thankaraj.S (Edp No. 4086) Vs The Tamil Nadu… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.11383 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 13.06.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARAN

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.11383 of 2022

S.Thankaraj

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd., Tirunelveli Division, represented by its Managing Director, Kattapomman Nagar, V.M.Chathiram, Tirunelveli.

¶11

2.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd., Nagercoil Region, represented by its General Manager, Ranithottam, Nagercoil. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 12 % per annum, for the period of delay from the date of retirement (31.05.2018) to till the date of reimbursement (26.09.2019) of amount paid towards his terminal and pension benefits namely EPF Employees Contribution, Gratuity, Encashment of earned/sick leaves within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court, without affecting his right to claim balance amounts towards those benefits.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugan For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajamohan Standing Counsel

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

1/3

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.11383 of 2022

¶19

2. Aggrieved against the belated settlement of the terminal benefits to the petitioner, he has claimed interest on the belated payment in this Writ Petition.

¶20

3. In identical issues, this Court has passed various orders, justifying the payment of interest to the aggrieved pensioners and in the order dated 13.12.2019 in W.P.(MD) No.26481 of 2019, the following order came to be passed:-

¶21

“ 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.

¶22

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, not before the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

¶23

4. This Court is of the view that the respondents could be directed to pay the interest on the belated payment, at the rate of 6% per annum, as ordered in the above Writ Petition.

¶24

5. At this juncture, Mr.R.Rajamohan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation would submit that owing to the Covid-19 pandemic situation and non-plying of buses for a considerable time, there has been a heavy revenue loss for the Corporation and therefore, the period of payment spread over three months as, ordered in the earlier Writ Petition, can be extended, so as to enable them to pay the interest amount, within a period of six months.

¶25

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner also does not have any objections to the same.

¶26

7. In this background, there shall be a direction to the respondents to pay the interest to the petitioner at the rate of 6% per annum on the belated payment of the retirement benefits, commencing from the date of retirement, till the date of actual disbursement, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶27

2/3

¶28

W.P.(MD)No.11383 of 2022

¶29

8. This Writ Petition stands partly allowed in accordance with the above terms. No costs.

¶30

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-II)

¶31

// True Copy //

¶32

/06/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) akv TO

¶33

1.The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd., Tirunelveli Division, Kattapomman Nagar, V.M.Chathiram, Tirunelveli. 2.The General Manager, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd., Nagercoil Region, Ranithottam, Nagercoil. +1 CC to M/s.R.RAJAMOHAN, Advocate ( SR-25353[F] dated 13/06/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.R.MURUGAN, Advocate ( SR-25258[F] dated 13/06/2022 ) Order made in W.P.(MD)No.11383 of 2022 Dated: 13.06.2022 NSN (CO) GC(24.06.2022) 3P 5C

¶34

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

¶35

3/3

Thankaraj.S (Edp No. 4086) v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thankaraj.S (Edp No. 4086) v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ismail, S/O Asan Kani, Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and

Thenmandala Kootturavu Vs the Presiding Officer

A.Ramesh Vs the Secretary to Government

Irulappan.M Vs The General Manager

Umavathy.R Vs The Chief Educational Officer

Kavitha.J Vs The Joint Registrar