Jeyakodi .M v. the State of Tamil Nadu
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner, a retired sales assistant, filed a writ petition seeking terminal benefits from the fourth respondent. Court accepted respondent's plea of fund paucity and granted one-year extension to settle dues.
What did the court decide?
Writ petition disposed with direction to settle terminal benefits on or before 31.08.2025. No order as to costs.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P(MD)No.2775 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.2775 of 2022
M.Jeyakodi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.*****
(First respondent is deleted vide Court order, dated 06.08.2024, in W.M.P(MD)No.14693 of 2022 in W.P(MD)No.2775 of 2022)
- 2.The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Khadi and Village Industries Board, Kuralagam, Chennai-600 108.
- 3.The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Palm Products Development Board, Kuralagam Building, Chennai-600 108.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the fourth respondent can be granted time to settle terminal benefits of retired employees due to paucity of funds.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M.Jeyakodi
- respondent
The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Khadi and Village Industries Board, Kuralagam, Chennai
- respondent
The Chief Executive Officer, Tamil Nadu Palm Products Development Board, Kuralagam Building, Chennai
- respondent
The Managing Director, Madurai, Virudhunagar, Dindigul District, Palmirah Jaggery Co-operative Marketing Federation Limited
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court