Disposed

P.Mohamed Ali v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.

Madras HC13 Oct 2025WP(MD)/28500/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired transport corporation employee sought 6% interest on delayed terminal benefits including provident fund, gratuity, leave salary and commuted pension. The court held the delay admitted and directed respondents to pay statutory interest within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to pay 6% per annum interest on belated terminal benefits from entitlement till payment, within 8 weeks; no costs.

P.Mohamed Ali Vs The Tamil Nadu State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.28500 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 13.10.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.28500 of 2025

P.Mohamed Ali

...Petitioner

The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited,

¶11

Represented by its Managing Director, Kumbakonam.

¶12

The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited,

¶13

Nagapattinam Region, Velankanni – 611 111.

¶14

The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to settle interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment of the petitioner terminal benefits including Provident Fund,

¶17

1/4

¶18

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

¶19

W.P.(MD).No.28500 of 2025

¶20

Gratuity, Terminal Leave Salary and Commuted Value of Pension from the date of his retirement i.e., from 31.03.2024 to 25.08.2025, the date on which the said benefits were settled to him.

¶21

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rahul

¶22

For Respondents : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh Standing Counsel

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

This writ petition has been filed for a writ of Mandamus to direct

¶25

the respondents to settle interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment of the petitioner terminal benefits including Provident Fund, Gratuity, terminal Leave Salary and Commuted Value of Pension from the date of his retirement i.e., from 31.03.2024 to 25.08.2025, the date on which the said benefits were settled to him.

¶26

Considering the admitted fact that there has been a delay in payment, the petitioner is entitled to statutory interest as provided under law.

¶27

In view of the same, the writ petition stands disposed of. The respondents are directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on

¶28

2/4

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.(MD).No.28500 of 2025

¶31

the belated terminal benefits payable to the petitioner from the date of his entitlement till the date of his payment within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶32

13.10.2025 NCC:yes/no 2/6 Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no ebsi

¶33

To:

¶34

The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited,

¶35

Kumbakonam.

¶36

The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited,

¶37

Nagapattinam Region, Velankanni – 611 111.

¶38

The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust,

¶39

Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶40

3/4

¶41

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

¶42

W.P.(MD).No.28500 of 2025

¶43

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

¶44

ebsi

¶45

W.P.(MD).No.28500 of 2025

13.10.2025

2/6

4/4

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

P.Mohamed Ali v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Mohamed Ali v. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) 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

State of Tamilnadu Rep.by Vs Lalithambika (DIed) , Sankaran Nair (died)

Chithiravel Vs Deputy Inspector General of Police

The Correspondent Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

S.Vaigaimeenavan Vs The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.

M.Seeni Vs The Management of

M.Raja Mohammed Vs M.Krishnan