Allowed

M.Ravichandran, (Edp No.7078) v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd.

Madras HC7 Jun 2024WP(MD)/11956/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, by consent, directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation to pay differential wages, pension, and terminal benefits to a retired employee based on a wage settlement dated 24.08.2022, applicable retrospectively from 01.09.2019.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pay differential benefits in respect of Wages, Pension, Pension Commutation, Gratuity and Encashment of Leave as per wage settlement dated 24.08.2022 with interest at 6% per an

M.Ravichandran, (Edp No.7078) Vs The Tamil… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 07.06.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶7

M.Ravichandran (EDP.No.7078) ... Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

1.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation(Tirunelveli) Ltd., Tirunelveli Division,

¶10

Rep. by its Managing Director, Kattapomman Nagar, V.M.Chathiram, Tirunelveli.

¶11

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

¶12

3.The Administrator,

¶13

Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees’ Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam,

¶14

Anna Salai, Chennai – 2. ... Respondents

¶15

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to revise the petitioner's scale of pay w.e.f. 01.09.2019 based on the new wage settlement dated 24.08.2022 and consequently to pay the petitioner

¶16

1/6

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶19

difference/arrears of wages for the period from 01.09.2019 to 31.05.2022 and also the difference in petitioner's terminal benefits namely Gratuity, Encashment of Leave, after revising the same based on such re-fixed scale of pay payable to the petitioner on the month of the petitioner's retirement, together with 18% interest per annum and further directing the respondents to revise the petitioner’s pension with effect from September 2019 and pension commutation, based on such re-fixed scale of pay payable to the petitioner on the month of the petitioner's retirement and to pay the petitioner arrears of pension for the period from September, 2019 and pension commutation, together with 18% interest per annum, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

¶20

For Petitioner :Mr.R.Murugan For R1 & R2 :Mr.D.Jebaraj For R3 :Mr.S.C.Herold Singh

¶21

O R D E R

¶22

The present writ petition has been filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to revise the petitioner's scale of pay w.e.f. 01.09.2019 based on the new wage settlement dated 24.08.2022 and consequently to pay the petitioner difference/arrears of wages for the period from 01.09.2019 to 31.05.2022 and also the difference in petitioner's terminal benefits namely Gratuity, Encashment of Leave, after

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶26

revising the same based on such re-fixed scale of pay payable to the petitioner on the month of the petitioner's retirement, together with 18% interest per annum and further, directing the respondents to revise the petitioner’s pension with effect from September 2019 and pension commutation, based on such re-fixed scale of pay payable to the petitioner on the month of the petitioner's retirement and to pay the petitioner arrears of pension for the period from September, 2019 and pension commutation, together with 18% interest per annum, within a stipulated period.

¶27

2 . Heard Mr.R.Murugan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.D.Jebaraj, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.S.C.Herold Singh, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent.

¶28

3 . By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶29

4 . The petitioner retired as “Checking Inspector” in the

¶30

respondent Corporation. He reached the age of superannuation and

¶31

3/6

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶34

retired from service on 31.05.2022.

¶35

5 . A settlement was entered into between the Union and the Management on 24.08.2022. But, it was made applicable with effect from 01.09.2019. Therefore, the petitioner was also entitled to the benefit under the said settlement, dated 24.08.2022. 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 the interest thereon.

¶36

6 . Hence, it is appropriate to direct the respondent Corporation to pay differential benefits in respect of Wages, Pension, Pension Commutation, Gratuity, Encashment of Leave as per wage settlement, dated 24.08.2022.

¶37

7. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of and the respondents are directed to pay differential benefits in respect of Wages, Pension, Pension Commutation, Gratuity and Encashment of Leave as per

¶38

4/6

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶41

wage settlement, dated 24.08.2022 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of retirement till the date of dispersal within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No Costs.

¶42

07.06.2024 NCC: Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking order PM

¶43

5/6

¶44

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

¶45

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶46

R.N.MANJULA, J.

¶47

¶48

W.P.(MD)No.11956 of 2024

¶49

07.06.2024

¶50

6/6

¶51

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

M.Ravichandran, (Edp No.7078) v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Ravichandran, (Edp No.7078) 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Radhakrishnan Vs Joint Director of Health Services

V.Malathi Vs The District Collector

Gunaseelan Vs the Chairman

K.Chellamuthu Vs The District Collector

A.Vijaya Vs The Director

M.Baskaran Vs The State of Tamil Nadu