Allowed

P.Boopathy v. The Additional Chief Secretary

Madras HC10 Mar 2025WP(MD)/6362/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition allowed. Court directed respondents to pay differential pension, gratuity, and leave salary benefits to the retired petitioner based on the 14th wage settlement, citing a prior order in a batch of writ petitions that established this right for employees retiring during the settlement's retrospective period.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay difference amounts of benefits under 14th wage revision settlement with 6% interest from date of retirement within 6 weeks.

P.Boopathy Vs The Additional Chief Secretary — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 10.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶7

P.Boopathy ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Transport Department, Secretariat,

¶10

Chennai – 09.

¶11

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kum) Limited, TNSTC Head Office, No.27, Railway Station New Road, Kumbakonam – 612 001.

¶12

3.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kum) Limited, Karaikudi Region, Maruthupathi, Managiri, Karaikudi.

¶13

4.The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 02. ... Respondents

¶14

1/6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶17

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay difference amount in the benefits in respect of monthly pension along with arrears, commuted value of pension, gratuity, earned leave salary from the date of the petitioner's retirement I.e.30.06.2022 as per 14 th wage settlement dated 24.08.2022 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the differential payment to be computed from the date of retirement till the date of actual payment by the respondents within a time to be fixed by this Court.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.SP.Vijaynivas For R1 : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader For R2 to R4 : Mr.K.Jagadeesh Balan Standing Counsel

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay difference amount in the benefits in respect of monthly pension along with arrears, commuted value of pension, gratuity, earned leave salary from the date of the petitioner's retirement i.e.30.06.2022 as per 14 th wage settlement dated 24.08.2022 with interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the differential payment to be computed from the date of retirement till the date of actual payment by the respondents.

¶21

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

¶22

2/6

¶23

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶24

2. The petitioner was retired from service on 30.06.2022 as Checking Inspector. Subsequent to the petitioner's retirement, settlement was entered between the union and the management on 24.08.2022. However, it was made applicable with effect from 01.09.2019. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the said benefit under the settlement, dated 24.08.2022, but the terminal benefits was settled without reference to the terms of the settlement. Requesting the respondent to extend the said benefit, the petitioner submitted a representation on 12.12.2024. Aggrieved by the inaction of the respondent in considering the representation to settle the benefits as per the settlement dated 24.08.2022, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶25

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing

¶26

Counsel for the respondent.

¶27

4. On perusal of the facts and circumstances of the case, in our considered view, the issue involved in the writ petition is no longer res-integra .

¶28

5. The issue involved in the present writ petition has been dealt with by this Court in W.P(MD)No.8910 of 2024 etc., batch. The relevant portion of the said order is extracted herein under:

¶29

3/6

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶32

“ 8. Once a particular decision for revising the wages is taken and evolved into an agreement between the parties including the State, as such granting the benefits retrospectively, then at the time of implementing the same, it cannot make any partial denial by passing orders to restrict the benefits. A Government letter cannot over rule the extant rules, when the rules say that the employees are entitled to the benefits immediately after retirement. Hence, without any doubt and in view of the settled legal position, the employees who worked in the Transport Corporation and have retired between 01.09.2019 and 31.07.2022 are entitled to receive the revised monetary benefits from the date on which the revised monetary benefits were agreed under the 14th wage revision settlement.

¶33

9. As the pension has also been revised under the terms of the 14th wage revision settlement and Rule 15 of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Rules, the last drawn basic salary shall be the salary to be taken for calculating pensions. As the last drawn salary has been revised in terms of the 14th wage revision settlement, the impugned letter cannot restrict the benefits. The respondents are directed to revise the monetary benefits and the difference in the revised pension which is payable from the date on which the revised monetary benefits were given to the working employees under the 14th wage revision settlement.”

¶34

6. As the facts are not disputed by the respondent, this Court by following the above order is inclined to allow the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed with the following direction:

¶35

The respondent is directed to pay the difference amounts of the

¶36

benefits for which the petitioner is legally entitled to as per the 14 th wage revision settlement, dated 24.08.2022 with 6% interest per annum to be computed from the date of petitioner's retirement i.e.,30.06.2022

¶37

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

¶38

4/6

¶39

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶40

till the date of actual payment within a period of 6 weeks from the date

¶41

of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶42

7. No costs.

¶43

10.03.2025

¶44

NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no Sn

¶45

To:

¶46

1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Transport Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 09.

¶47

2.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kum) Limited, TNSTC Head Office, No.27, Railway Station New Road, Kumbakonam – 612 001.

¶48

3.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kum) Limited, Karaikudi Region, Maruthupathi, Managiri, Karaikudi.

¶49

4.The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 02.

¶50

5/6

¶51

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

¶52

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶53

BATTU DEVANAND, J.

¶54

¶55

W.P.(MD)No.6362 of 2025

¶56

10.03.2025

¶57

6/6

¶58

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

P.Boopathy v. The Additional Chief Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Boopathy v. The Additional Chief Secretary

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

The Secretary Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

D.Vijay Rathinaraj Vs The Director of Primary Education (Aided Schools)

C.Elangiam Vs The Secretary to Government

A.Mary Valsala Arulthos Vs The General Manager

M.Kannan Vs Celin kalaiselvi

Thanka Mithra.M Vs The State of Tamil Nadu