Allowed¶39

P.Jeevanatham v. The Managing Director

Madras HC9 Feb 2026WP(MD)/3532/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Belated payment of retirement/terminal benefits — Gratuity, Provident Fund, Pension Commutation; interest at 6% per annum for delay in settlement; writ of mandamus under Article 226; Tamilnadu Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd.; Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees' Pension Trust; reliance on S.K. Dua v. State of Haryana (2008) 3 SCC 44 and Division Bench common order dated 04.07.2014 in W.A.(MD)No.403 of 2010 batch; Articles 14, 19 and 21; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed: respondents directed to pay interest for the belated payment of the petitioner's retirement/terminal benefits at 6% p.a. within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order; no costs. ¶39

P.Jeevanatham Vs The Managing Director — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶39

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to interest for the belated payment of his Gratuity, Provident Fund and Pension Commutation, and at what rate and within what time frame, following his retirement on 31.05.2024 and settlement of benefits only on 21.12.2025.

¶12

Court's answer

The employer is liable to settle retirement benefits to its employees without any delay, and where the benefits are settled belatedly, the delay has to be compensated by way of interest for the belated payment.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

Following the dictum laid down in S.K. Dua v. State of Haryana and the Division Bench common order in W.A.(MD)No.403 of 2010 batch, the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondents to pay interest for the belated payment of the petitioner's retirement/terminal benefits at the rate of 6% p.a. within six months from receipt of a copy of the order, with no costs.

¶39

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court, Madurai Bench (B. Pugalendhi, J.), WP(MD)No.3532 of 2026, decided 09.02.2026: The petitioner, a Special Grade Conductor who retired on 31.05.2024 after 31 years of service, had his Gratuity, Provident Fund and Pension Commutation settled only on 21.12.2025; his representation dated 27.01.2026 seeking interest for the belated payment was not considered. Holding that the employer is liable to settle retirement benefits without delay and that belated settlement must be compensated by interest, and following S.K.Dua vs. State of Haryana, 2008 (3) SCC 44, and a Division Bench common order dated 04.07.2014 in W.A.(MD)No.403 of 2010 batch which fixed interest at 6% per annum, the Court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to pay interest at 6% p.a. for the belated payment of retirement/terminal benefits within six months from receipt of a copy of the order. No costs.

¶1

WP(MD). No.3532 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 09.02.2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

WP(MD)No.3532 of 2026

¶7

P.Jeevanatham ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The Managing Director, Tamilnadu Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd.,

¶10

Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶11

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

¶12

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum to the petitioner for the belated payment of Gratuity, Provident Fund and Pension Commutation from the date of retirement to the date of actual payment within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

¶13

1/6

¶14

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

¶15

WP(MD). No.3532 of 2026

¶16

For Petitioner : M/s.D.Ramya For R1 : Mr.K.Ramaiah, Standing Counsel For R2 : Mr.SC.Herold Singh, Standing Counsel

¶17

ORDER

¶18

The petitioner was appointed as a Conductor in the Transport Corporation on 27.01.1993 and after rendering 31 years of service, he retired from service as Special Grade Conductor on 31.05.2024. However, the retirement benefits, namely, Gratuity, Provident Fund and Pension Commutation, due to the petitioner were settled only on 21.12.2025. Seeking interest for the belated payment, the petitioner gave a representation to the respondents on 27.01.2026, however, it was not considered by the respondents. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the above said relief.

¶19

Mr.K.Ramaiah, learned Standing Counsel, who takes notice on

¶20

behalf of the 1^st respondent, submits that the retirement benefits have been settled to the petitioner, however belatedly.

¶21

2/6

¶22

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

¶23

WP(MD). No.3532 of 2026

¶24

By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.

¶25

This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival submissions made and also perused the materials placed on record.

¶26

The employer is liable to settle the retirement benefits to its employees without any delay and in case, if it is settled belatedly, it has to be compensated by way of interest for the belated payment. In this regard, the Hon'ble Apex Court in S.K.Dua vs. State of Haryana reported in 2008 (3) SCC 44 , has held as follows:

¶27

“14. In the circumstances, prima facie, we are of the view that the grievance voiced by the appellant appears to be well founded that he would be entitled to interest on such benefits. If there are statutory rules occupying the field, the appellant could claim payment of interest relying on such rules. If there are administrative instructions, guidelines or norms prescribed for the purpose, the appellant may claim benefit of interest on that basis. But even in absence of statutory rules,

¶28

3/6

¶29

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

¶30

WP(MD). No.3532 of 2026

¶31

administrative instructions or guidelines, an employee can claim interest under Part III of the Constitution relying on Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, that retiral benefits are not in the nature of “bounty” is, in our opinion well founded and needs no authority in support thereof. In that view of the matter, in our considered opinion, the High Court was not right in dismissing the petition in living even without issuing notice to the respondents.”

¶32

Following the same, in a similar issue, a Division Bench of this Court, in W.A.(MD)No.403 of 2010, etc. batch, vide common order dated 04.07.2014, has fixed the rate of interest at 6% per annum and held as under:-

¶33

“5. ..... even though there is no provision in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund for payment of interest, cannot stand in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in S.K.Dua v. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2008) 3 SCC 44. As a matter of fact, the Rules do not contemplate belated payment of retirement benefits. The Rules contemplate prompt payment. When the Rules

¶34

4/6

¶35

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

¶36

WP(MD). No.3532 of 2026

¶37

contemplate prompt payment and not bleated payment, the Rules will not contain a provision for payment of interest. The Pension Fund which was created as a Trust by the Corporation was supposed to act in trust for the employees' benefit. If the Trust could not make payments within the time stipulated, then, irrespective of whether there is any provision for payment of interest or not, the Corporation is obliged to make payment.”

¶38

Following the dictum laid down on this issue, the writ petition

¶39

is allowed with a direction to the respondents to pay interest, for the belated payment of retirement/terminal benefits of the petitioner, at the rate of 6% p.a., within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

¶40

09.02.2026

¶41

ogy

¶42

Index : Yes / No. Internet: Yes / No. NCC : Yes / No.

¶43

5/6

¶44

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

¶45

WP(MD). No.3532 of 2026