Annamalai University Vs R. Thiyagarajan

Against the very same common order dated 25.04.2024, which is a common order passed by the Writ Court, writ appeals having been entertained by this Court

¶18

and the Division Bench in which one of us (R.Suresh Kumar, J.) was a party, disposed of the same. One such order is dated 18.09.2025 in W.A.No.2779 of 2025, which reads thus,

¶19

1 of 6

¶20

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

¶21

WA No. 3587 of 2025

¶22

“ This Intra Court Appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court made in W.P.No.3050 of 2023 dated 25.03.2024 as amended on 25.04.2024.

¶23

2.In fact, the said order passed by the learned Writ Court is a common order where number of writ petitions including the above said writ petition has been disposed of, where the following directions has been given by a learned Single Judge, which is as follows:

¶24

8. In view of the above discussions, the respondent is directed to disburse the balance amount of the petitioners- respective commutation and the balance amount of their earned leave wages in accordance with law, in view of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.49 of 2007 etc., batch of writ petitions, challenging the Government order in G.O.Ms.No.402, Higher Education (H2) Department, dated 13.12.2006 within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that the balance amount of gratuity and earned leave wages can be considered on the calculation memo submitted by each of the petitioners.

¶25

3.Since all the writ petitioners including the present respondent/writ petitioner already been retired from service and

¶26

2 of 6

¶27

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

¶28

WA No. 3587 of 2025

¶29

as the retirement benefits since have not been disbursed, they approached the learned Writ Court and the prayers therein having been considered, it was allowed by the Writ Court.

¶30

4.During the last hearing while making some arguments, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the University submitted that since the University is in severe financial crunch, every time it depends upon the Government for the bulk disbursal of the amount, as the generation of funds for the University is getting reduced considerably because of closure of Distance Education programme, it takes reasonable time to comply with the orders passed by the Writ Court. In that regard, it was directed to file an undertaking affidavit within which time such compliance could be made by the University. Pursuant to the same, today when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the University has stated that the Registrar of the University has filed an undertaking affidavit dated 16.09.2025 where inter alia the following has been stated:

¶31

4.I respectfully state that the Appellant University is in financial crunch. In view of closure of Distance Centres run by the University at various places, the revenue of the University has come to a standstill. The Appellant University has been expecting the grants every time from the Government of Tamil Nadu to pay salary and pension etc. to the teaching/nonteaching staffs of the appellant University. The grants released by

¶32

3 of 6

¶33

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

¶34

WA No. 3587 of 2025

¶35

the Government of Tamil Nadu though is handsome compared to other universities, it is not enough to satisfy the requirements of the University. The request made by the Appellant University to the Government of Tamil Nadu to release the grants to pay the balance retirement benefits of the petitioner and the similarly placed persons is in process. As soon as the grants from the government is received, the Appellant University shall pay the balance retirement benefits such as earned and unearned leave to the petitioner. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, he was paid gratuity in full. I undertake to settle the balance retirement benefits payable to the petitioner within four months from today without fail.

¶36

5.Relying upon these averments made in the undertaking affidavit, the learned Senior Counsel would contend that within a reasonable period as indicated in Paragraph 4 of the undertaking affidavit, the entire payment to be settled to the petitioner would be settled.

¶37

6.In this context, Mr.V.Ajoy Khose, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that though the respondent/writ petitioner has already retired from service, he has not been paid the retirement benefits. By virtue of the same, he and his family is suffering a lot and therefore, if earliest disbursal is made by the University that would be helpful to the respondent/writ petitioner and his family.

¶38

4 of 6

¶39

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

¶40

WA No. 3587 of 2025

¶41

7.Having taken note of all these factual matrices and having

¶42

regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, we are inclined to dispose of the Writ Appeal with the following directions:

¶43

(i) As undertaken by the University, it shall disburse the retirement benefits payable to the respondent/writ petitioner within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶44

(ii) Once such disbursal is made, there can be no further issue pending between them i.e., the respondent/writ petitioner and the University for adjudication.

¶45

8.In that view of the matter, with the above directions, this Writ Appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.”

¶46

2. In view of the same, this writ appeal is also disposed of on the same terms as has been made in the said writ appeal ie., W.A.No.2779 of 2025 dated 18.09.2025. Accordingly, this writ appeal is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶47

(R.S.K.,J.) (S.S.A.,J.) 17-12-2025

¶48

KST

¶49

5 of 6

¶50

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

¶51

WA No. 3587 of 2025

¶52

R.SURESH KUMAR, J. AND SHAMIM AHMED, J.