Allowed

P. Rathinam v. the Management of Tamil Nadu State

Madras HC5 Mar 2024WA(MD)/953/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ Appeal filed to set aside a previous order dismissing a writ petition regarding pension matters. Petitioner sought leave to withdraw the original writ petition due to technical defects. Court allowed withdrawal, dismissed the writ appeal accordingly, and set aside a specific prior order.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition and dismissal of the writ appeal with liberty to file a fresh petition.

P. Rathinam Vs the Management of Tamil Nadu… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.A(MD)No.953 of 2013

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 28.08.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

¶6

W.A(MD)No.953 of 2013 in W.P.(MD).No.1339 of 2007

P.Rathinam

Petitioner(s)

1.The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., Trichy Region,

¶11

Rep., by its, Managing Director, Trichy.

¶12

2.The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Employee Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Annasalai, Chennai-2. Respondent(s)

¶13

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order passed in W.P(MD)No.1339 of 2007 dated 07.10.2010 on the file of this Court.

¶14

1/4

¶15

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

¶16

W.A(MD)No.953 of 2013

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.S.Arunachalam

¶18

For Respondent : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh (for R2) Standing Counsel

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

(By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)

¶21

(Judgment of the Court was made by the Hon'ble G.R.SWAMINATHAN J., )

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the writ petition filed by the petitioners suffers from formal and technical defects. Hence, he seeks leave to withdraw the writ petition itself.

¶23

We are satisfied with the said submission and therefore, We permit the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition itself.

¶24

3.Accordingly, this writ Appeal itself dismissed as withdrawn. Consequently, the writ petition is also dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition on the same cause of action and the order dated 05.03.2024 is set aside. In the event, the petitioner succeeds in the fresh round of writ proceedings to be initiated by him, he may not be entitled to

¶25

2/4

¶26

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

¶27

W.A(MD)No.953 of 2013

¶28

claim interest for the period covered by the present round of writ proceedings.

¶29

No costs.

¶30

[G.R.S., J.] [K.R.S., J.] 28.08.2025 4/4

¶31

NCC : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Index : Yes / No vsg

¶32

¶33

1.The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd., Trichy Region, Rep., by its, Managing Director, Trichy.

¶34

2.The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Employee Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Annasalai, Chennai-2

¶35

3/4

¶36

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

¶37

W.A(MD)No.953 of 2013

¶38

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.,

¶39

and K.RAJASEKAR, J.,

¶40

vsg

¶41

W.A(MD)No.953 of 2013

28.08.2025

4/4

4/4

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

P. Rathinam v. the Management of Tamil Nadu State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P. Rathinam v. the Management of Tamil Nadu State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Reliance General Insurance Company, Vs C.Gurulakshmi

Tamil Andu State Transport Corporation Vs a.Shanmugavelu

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd., Vs C.Isakkiammal

M.Ravichandran(Died) (Substituted by) R.Vasuki, Vs The Management of

The Branch Manager Vs MINOR.D.GOWTHAM(DIED),1).Dhanachamy

N.Hiddayathulla Vs M.Neelakumar