Disposed¶26

Arivuvoli D v. The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.

Madras HC17 Nov 2025WP(MD)/32758/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus; interest on delayed terminal benefits; statutory interest; 6% per annum; EPF Employees Contribution; Gratuity; deceased retired employee M.Dhanabalan Staff No. CR11307; Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd; delay 09.02.24 to 24.08.25; Article 226 Constitution of India; W.P.(MD)No.32758 of 2025; Madras High Court Madurai Bench; K.Kumaresh Babu J.; disposed within 12 weeks; no costs.

What did the court decide?

Interest at 6% per annum on the belated terminal benefits payable to the petitioner, from the date of entitlement till the date of payment, to be paid within 12 weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no costs. ¶26

Arivuvoli D Vs The Management of Tamilnadu State… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.32758 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 17.11.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.32758 of 2025

D.Arivuvoli

...Petitioner

The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd, Madurai Region Rep. By its Managing Director Madurai.

¶11

... Respondent

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to pay the petitioner interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum, for the period of delay from 09.02.24 to 24.08.25, in paying the amounts paid towards the terminal benefits namely EPF Employees Contribution and Gratuity of her deceased husband/retired employee (Late) M.Dhanabalan, Staff No. CR11307, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Honble Court and without affecting the right to claim

¶13

1/4

¶14

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

¶15

W.P.(MD).No.32758 of 2025

¶16

balance amounts towards those benefits and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arunachalam

¶18

For Respondent : Mr.Gladson Miachel Rajadurai Standing Counsel

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This writ petition is filed seeking direction to the respondent to pay the petitioner interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum, for the period of delay from 09.02.24 to 24.08.25, in paying the amounts paid towards the terminal benefits namely EPF Employees Contribution and Gratuity of her deceased husband/retired employee (Late) M.Dhanabalan, Staff No. CR11307.

¶21

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

¶22

2/4

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.(MD).No.32758 of 2025

¶25

In view of the same, the writ petition stands disposed of. The

¶26

respondent is directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the belated terminal benefits payable to the petitioner from the date of his entitlement till the date of his payment within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶27

17.11.2025

¶28

NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no gvn

¶29

To:

¶30

The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd, Madurai Region Rep. By its Managing Director Madurai.

¶31

3/4

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.(MD).No.32758 of 2025

¶34

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

¶35

gvn

¶36

W.P.(MD)No.32758 of 2025

¶37

17.11.2025

¶38

4/4

¶39

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

Arivuvoli D v. The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arivuvoli D v. The Management of Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Correspondent-cum-Secretary Vs Dr. P.Victoria Thangam

The Correspondent cum Secretary Vs Dr.P.Victoria Thangam

The Correspondent-cum-Secretary Vs Dr. P.Victoria Thangam

Chandrasekaran Vs The Managing Director

J.Jerena Vs R.Darwin Antony

R.Muthulakshmi Vs B.Murugesh