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

T.K.Vadivelu v. The Managing Director

DISPOSED OF
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
22 July 2026
Bench
P.T. Ashaauthor
Case no.
WP 28561/2026

Judgment

ORDER This Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs: "Directing the respondents to pay the pending amount of difference of gratuity of Rs.35,434 and difference of leave salary of Rs.48,175 to the petitioner as communicated as a reply under right to information act 2005 along with interest at the rate of 6 percentage per annum payable from the date of retirement in the light of Judgment passed by this Hon'ble High Court on

18.10.2024 in W.P.No.30627 of 2024 within the time that may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court."

¶2The case of the petitioner is that he joined the services of the respondent Corporation on 27.06.1987 and he retired from his service on

30.04.2020.

¶3The grievance of the petitioner is that after his retirement, the arrears towards the differential amounts of gratuity and earned leave salary payable from 01.09.2019 have not been paid to him as per 12(3) Settlement. Hence, the petitioner sought for information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, regarding the pending amounts payable to them. In the reply furnished under the said Act, the respondent Corporation had admitted that a differential amount of Rs.73,508/- towards gratuity and Rs.39,321/- towards leave salary are payable to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner sent representation dated 02.06.2026 to the respondent seeking for payment of the due amounts. Since the same did not evoke any response, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ Page3 of 4 petition for the relief stated supra.

¶4The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent fairly submitted that the respondents are willing to pay the eligible amounts due to the petitioner in accordance with 12(3) settlement, as reflected in the RTI reply, together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment.

¶5Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the materials available on record.

¶6Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of the learned Standing Counsel, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pay the eligible amounts due to the petitioner in accordance with the 12(3) Settlement, as reflected in the RTI reply, together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date on which the amounts became due till the date of actual payment. This payment shall be made within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. 22-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order SHR Page4 of 4 P.T.ASHA J. SHR To

¶1The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd., Head Office, 37 Metupalayam Road, Coimbatore -641 043

¶2The Administrator Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Pension Fund Trust, Tiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002 22-07-2026

Case details

Parties and counsel

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA T.K.Vadivelu ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd., Head Office, 37 Metupalayam Road, Coimbatore -641 043 2. The Administrator Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Pension Fund Trust, Tiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002 ..Respondent(s) Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents to pay the Petitioner a sum of Rs.73,508/- towards the difference in Gratuity and a sum of Rs.39,321 - towards difference in earned leave salary as admitted by the Respondent in their RTI reply with interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum within a specified time as may be fixed by this Honble Court. For Petitioner(s): Mr. Krishnasamy R. For Respondent(s): Mr.M.Murali Vinodh, Standing Counsel for R1. Page2 of 4

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.