M. Moorthy Vs the General Manager

The General Manager, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Kanchipuram Region, Chennai-Bangalore Highways, Karapetti, Kanchipuram – 631 552.

¶11

The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust, No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600002.

¶12

..Respondent(s)

¶13

Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay interest at 10% for the belated payment of terminal benefits such as Gratuity, Leave Salary and commutation of pension amount to the petitioner.

¶14

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.T. Karkivelan For Respondent(s) : Ms.S.Pavithra

¶15

__________ Page1 of 4

¶16

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

¶17

WP No. 3234 of 2026

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Aggrieved by the belated payment of terminal benefits such as Gratuity,

¶20

Leave Salary and commutation of pension amount, the petitioner has come up with this Writ petition seeking interest at the rate of 10% per annum, for the said delay caused on the part of the respondents.

¶21

In view of the consent expressed by the learned counsel on either side, this Writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶22

When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court, the order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in a similar matter in W.P.No.25610 of 2024 dated 03.09.2024, wherein this Court had directed the respondent to pay interest at the rate of 6% p.a. for the belated payment of terminal benefits to the petitioner therein within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents did not dispute the above submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶24

__________ Page2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

WP No. 3234 of 2026

¶27

This Court perused the order passed in W.P.No.25610 of 2024,

¶28

wherein, this Court has held as under :-

¶29

“5.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and the grievance expressed by the petitioner, there shall be a direction to the respondent to pay interest at the rate of 6% p.a. for the belated payment of terminal benefits to the petitioner within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that if the amount is not paid within the time frame fixed by this Court, it will fetch interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date on which the amount became due and payable till the date of actual realisation.”

¶30

The aforesaid decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. Accordingly, applying the ratio laid down in the above case, this Writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 6% p.a. for the belated payment of Gratuity, Leave Salary and commutation of pension amount to the petitioner within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶31

06-02-2026

¶32

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶33

VM

¶34

__________ Page3 of 4

¶35

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

WP No. 3234 of 2026

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

VM

To:

The General Manager, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Kanchipuram Region, Chennai-Bangalore Highways, Karapetti, Kanchipuram – 631 552.

¶41

The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust, No.2, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600002.

¶42

WP No. 3234 of 2026

¶43

06-02-2026

¶44

__________ Page4 of 4

¶45

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

M. Moorthy v. the General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Moorthy v. the General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Sindhu Vs the Personal Secretary to Government

M.Swaminathan Vs The Principal Secretary to Government

V.Muniyandi Vs the Principal Chief Conservator

Dr. S. Vimala Vs union of Territory of Puducherry, rep by

P. Rajasekaran Vs the General Manager

B.Reziyabee Vs the State of Tamil Nadu