Allowed

Kantha. T v. The Management

Madras HC22 Nov 2023REV.APLW(MD)/203/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Review application filed to rectify an omission in the prayer clause of an earlier writ petition regarding terminal benefits. The Single Judge amended the prayer to explicitly include Encashment of Leave alongside EPF and Gratuity and directed the registry to correct the order copy.

What did the court decide?

The review application is disposed of by directing the registry to amend the order copy and issue a fresh amended order to include Encashment of Leave in the prayer.

Kantha. T Vs The Management — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Rev.Applw(MD).No.203 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 22.11.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

Rev.Applw.(MD)No.203 of 2023

¶7

T.Kantha ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Management of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., Trichy Region, Rep. By its General Manager, Trichy. ... Respondent

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER : Review Application filed under Rules 1 & 2 r/w. Section 114 of CPC, to review the order of this Court dated 06.07.2023 in W.P. (MD)No.16302 of 2023 filed by the applicant.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arunachalam

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

This Review Application has been filed to review of the order of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.16302 of 2023 dated 06.07.2023.

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

Rev.Applw(MD).No.203 of 2023

¶18

2.The petitioner herein has filed a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.

¶19

16302 of 2023 seeking a direction to the respondent to pay the petitioner's interest at the rate of 18% per annum, for the period of delay from 01.06.2022 to 30.05.2023 in paying the amounts paid towards her term benefits namely EPF Employee's contribution and Gratuity. This Court by an order dated 06.07.2023, disposed of the Writ Petition by directing the respondent Corporation to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum for belated settlement of petitioner's terminal benefits. Against which, the petitioner herein has filed the present Review Application.

¶20

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶21

Mr.S.Arunachalam submitted that the prayer in the writ petition is wrongly typed by mentioning only two benefits and by omitting one benefit, namely Encashment of leave. Unless the aforesaid error is rectified, the respondent may decline interest for the benefit of the Encahsment of Leave and thereby, the petitioner will be denied of the said benefit.

¶22

4.In view of the above, this Court is inclined to amend the prayer

¶23

2/4

¶24

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

¶25

Rev.Applw(MD).No.203 of 2023

¶26

portions in the Writ Petition alone and the same is read as follows:-

¶27

“Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the

¶28

Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to pay the petitioner's interest at the rate of 18% per annum, for the period of delay from 01.06.2022 to 30.05.2023 in paying the amounts paid towards her terminal benefits namely EPF Employee's Contribution, Gratuity and Encashment of leave.

¶29

The present writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondent to pay the petitioner's interest at the rate of 18% per annum, for the period of delay from 01.06.2022 to 30.05.2023 in paying the amounts paid towards her terminal benefits namely EPF Employee's Contribution, Gratuity and Encashment of leave”

¶30

Accordingly, this Review Application is disposed of. The Registry is directed to carry out the aforesaid amendments in the order copy and issue fresh amended order copy in accordance with law. There shall be

¶31

3/4

¶32

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

¶33

Rev.Applw(MD).No.203 of 2023

¶34

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶35

Mrn

¶36

no order as to costs.

¶37

22.11.2023

¶38

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Mrn

¶39

¶40

The Management of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., Trichy Region, Rep. By its General Manager, Trichy.

¶41

Rev.Applw.(MD)No.203 of 2023

¶42

22.11.2023

¶43

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

¶44

4/4

Kantha. T v. The Management

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kantha. T v. The Management

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

The Managing Director Vs Samudhayamani

Saraswathi Vs Krishnamoorthy (Died), 2. Seethalakshmi

Samuthirakani, Vs Kasirajan

K.Krishnan Vs K.Geetha

Subramanian. R Vs The Management of

Murugan. S Vs The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.