VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

V.Palani v. The Managing Director

DISPOSED OF WITH DIRECTION
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
28 January 2026
Bench
M.Dhandapaniauthor
Case no.
WP 1957/2026

Follow Madras High CourtFollow M.Dhandapani

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28-01-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI WP No. 1957, 1959, 1963, 2085 and 2224 of 2026 V.Palani S.Thiagarajan V.S.Rajarajan V.Samidurai D.Manoharan Petitioner in WP.No.1957 of 2026 Petitioner in WP.No.1959 of 2026 Petitioner in WP.No.1963 of 2026 Petitioner in WP.No.2085 of 2026 Petitioner in WP.No.2224 of 2026 Vs

¶1The Managing Director Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, Pallavan Illam, Mount Road, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.Tamil Nadu State Transport corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust, Rep. By Its Administrator, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-60 002. Respondents in both the writ petitions COMMON PRAYER;Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to settle the interest for the belated payment of retirement benefits such as provident fund, gratuity, earned leave surrender and other retirement benefits payable to the petitioner with 12 percent rate of interest within the time frame that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner(s): M/s.L.Poovendra Perumal in all the writ petitions For Respondent: Mr.A.Vinoth Raj R1 Mr.C.S.K.Sathish R2 in all the writ petitions COMMON ORDER These Writ Petitions have been filed to directing the respondents to settle the interest for the belated payment of retirement benefits such as provident fund, gratuity, earned leave surrender and other retirement benefits payable to the petitioner with 12 percent rate of interest.

¶2It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioners, who had joined the services of the respondent Corporation, had retired from service, however, the terminal benefits have been settled belatedly. Therefore, the petitioners claimed 9% interest on the belated payment of terminal benefits and they have also made representations to pay interest for the belated payment of terminal benefits which has not been evoked any response so far. Hence, the petitioners are before this Court.

¶3The learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Transport Corporation would fairly submit that in view of the similar order passed by this Court in W.P.No.20622 of 2025, they are willing to pay the interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment of the eligible and admissible amount.

¶4Heard the learned counsel for both sides.

¶5In view of the above submission of the learned Standing Counsel, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment of admissible terminal benefits from the date of retirement till the date of actual disbursal of the terminal benefits of the petitioners within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶6Accordingly, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 28-01-2026 rli Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To

1.The Managing Director Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, Pallavan Illam, Mount Road, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.Tamil Nadu State Transport corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust, Rep. By Its Administrator, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-60 002. WPeNo.e1957eofe2026 M.DHANDAPANIoJ. rli WPoNo.o1957,o1959,o1963,o2085o ando2224oofo2026 28-01-2026

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.