The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking quashing of an order and directing disbursement of a specific amount, which had already been deposited pursuant to a prior High Court order. The Court held the petition not maintainable as the remedy lay in moving the High Court regarding the earlier dismissed petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WP No. 5174 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20-02-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY WP No. 5174 of 2026
D.Arul Kamaraj
..Petitioner
Vs
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Gratuity) O/o. the Deputy Commissioner Labour Office, Chennai - 600 006.
..Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the respondent in the impugned order No.Na.Ka.E.112/ 2019 dated 13.10.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to disburse the amount of Rs.3,00,591/- as per the order of this Court in W.M.P No.15936/2020.
For Petitioner: No appearance For Respondent: Mr.S.Senthil Murugan Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition is filed to quash the impugned order in Na.Ka.E.112/ 2019 dated 13.10.2025 and consequently to direct the respondent to disburse the amount of Rs.3,00,591/- as per the order of this Court in W.M.P No.15936 of 2020.
petition, it can be seen that earlier, when there was an order passed in
Page1 of 3
WP No. 5174 of 2026
P.G.No.90 of 2016 and when the management challenged the said award, by an interim order in W.P.No.12882 of 2020, the sum of Rs.3,00,591/- was ordered to be deposited to the credit of the above matter before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour. The management also deposited the said amount. Subsequently, the writ petition was dismissed for default. While dismissing the writ petition for default, no express direction has been given with reference to payment of the said amount to the Workman. Therefore, the Workman made an application before the appropriate authority. The appropriate authority has rejected the same since the amount has been deposited pursuant to the High Court order. No further direction has been issued. Instead of filing a miscellaneous application in the said writ petition, the present writ petition is filed. The same is not maintainable and therefore the writ petition is dismissed . It will be open for the petitioner to either mention the writ petition or file an application in the said writ petition for the said relief. No costs.
20-02-2026
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
NSL
To
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Gratuity) O/o. the Deputy Commissioner Labour Office, Chennai - 600 006.
__________ Page2 of 3
WP No. 5174 of 2026
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
NSL
WP No. 5174 of 2026
20-02-2026
__________ Page3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition filed to quash an order and direct payment, where the correct remedy is to move the High Court regarding a previously dismissed petition, is maintainable?
Whether the High Court should dismiss a writ petition as not maintainable or allow it to be filed via miscellaneous application.
D.Arul Kamaraj
The Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Gratuity) O/o. the Deputy Commissioner Labour Office, Chennai
D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
