This bench considered a writ petition seeking interest for belated payment of retirement benefits. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court directed the respondent to pay interest for the delay.
Directed respondents to pay interest at 6% per annum from the date of retirement till actual disbursement within six months.
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.
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 18.02.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
S.Samidurai ... Petitioner
Vs
PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to pay the interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum for retirement benefits, viz., gratuity, leave salary and all other monetary benefits the petitioner is entitled for from the date of retirement till the date on which his terminal benefits were paid, by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 11.11.2025 within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.
1/7
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
| For Petitioner | : Mr.M.E.Ilango |
|---|---|
| For R1 | : Mrs.Chamundi Bose |
| Standing Counsel | |
| For R2 | : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh |
| Additional Government Pleader | |
| O R D E R |
This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus, directing the
respondent to pay interest to the petitioner at the rate of 18% per annum, for the period of delay from the date of retirement till the date of actual disbursement, in paying the terminal benefits, within the time stipulated by this Court.
2/7
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
3.Mrs.Chamundi Bose, learned Standing Counsel takes
notice for the first respondent. Mr. Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the second respondent.
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:
“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
3/7
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
purpose, the appellant may claim benefit of interest on that basis. But even in absence of statutory rules, 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.”
“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
4/7
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
Rules contemplate prompt payment. When the Rules 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.”
writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent/Transport Corporation to pay interest for the belated payment of retirement benefits at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of retirement till the date of actual disbursement, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
18.02.2026
Index:Yes Internet:Yes vrn
5/7
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
To
6/7
W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
vrn
Order made in W.P(MD)No.4568 of 2026
18.02.2026
7/7
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an employer is liable to pay interest for belated payment of retirement benefits.
At what rate the interest for delayed gratuity and other terminal benefits should be computed.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
S.K. Dua vs. State of HaryanaApplied¶26
S.K.Dua vs. State of Haryana, 2008 (3) SCC 44 · Who else cites this
W.A.(MD)No.403 of 2010Followed¶32
W.A.(MD)No.403 of 2010, common order dated 04.07.2014
S. Samidurai
The Accountant General (A and E), Chennai
The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Tirunelveli
B. Pugalandhi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
