Allowed

Pannerselvam.P v. The Managing Director

Madras HC25 Nov 2022WP(MD)/26648/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition allowed. Court directed respondent transport corporation to pay differential gratuity and leave salary benefits due to a retrospective settlement applicable from the petitioner's retirement with 6% interest. No costs awarded.

What did the court decide?

Respondent to pay differential gratuity and leave salary with 6% interest per annum from retirement date; to be paid within six months.

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

¶1

W.P(MD)No.26648 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 25.11.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.26648 of 2022

P.Pannerselvam

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Managing Director,

¶11

Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (KMB) Limited, New Railway Station Road,

¶12

Kumbakonam – 612 001.

¶13

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (KMB) Limited, Karaikudi Region, Managiri Post, Maruthapathi, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. ... Respondents

¶14

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶15

praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to disburse the petitioner's difference amount of Gratuity and Surrender Leave on

¶16

the basis of 12(3) Settlement dated 04.01.2018 along with 6% interest.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gokul

¶18

For Respondents : Mr.K.Jagadees Balan, Standing Counsel.

¶19

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

1/4

¶21

W.P(MD)No.26648 of 2022

¶22

ORDER

¶23

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶24

The writ petitioner joined as Conductor in the respondent Corporation. He reached the age of superannuation and retired on 31.07.2017. Subsequently, settlement was entered into between the Union and the Management on 04.01.2018. But it was made applicable with effect from 01.09.2016. Therefore, the petitioner was also entitled to the benefit under the said settlement dated 04.01.2018. But his terminal benefits were settled without reference to the terms of the settlement. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to not only the difference in benefits but also interest thereon.

¶25

This stand of the petitioner cannot be disputed. I, therefore, direct the respondent corporation to pay differential benefits in respect of gratuity and leave salary. This amount shall be paid within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondent have to make the differential payment with 6% interest per annum to be computed form the date of the petitioner's retirement till the date of payment.

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

2/4

¶28

W.P(MD)No.26648 of 2022

¶29

The Writ Petition is allowed accordingly. No costs.

¶30

25.11.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias

¶31

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶32

3/4

¶33

W.P(MD)No.26648 of 2022

¶34

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶35

ias

¶36

W.P(MD)No.26648 of 2022

¶37

25.11.2022

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4

Pannerselvam.P v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pannerselvam.P 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

Arulkumar.K Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

Inigo .S Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

Pothumponnu Vs The District Collector

S.Manickavasagam Pillai Vs The Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies

Srikanth.K, (Staff No. 15DR014) Vs The Managing Director

Giridharan.G Vs The Managing Director