- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 5 June 2023
- Bench
- G.R.Swaminathan
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 12918/2023
Judgment
ORDER Heard the learned counsel on either side.
¶2The writ petitioner joined the respondent Corporation as Driver. He retired on 30.11.2021. However, his terminal benefits were settled only on
26.03.2023. It is well settled that for such belated settlement, the retired employee is entitled to interest. I therefore direct the respondent Corporation to pay interest to the writ petitioner computed at the rate of 6% per annum on the belated disbursement from the date of retirement till date of settlement. The interest amount shall be paid within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
¶3This writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
05.06.2023 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No MGA To
1.The Managing Director, Management of State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd., Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 2.
2.The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002.
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. MGA
05.06.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.06.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN M.Karuppasamy ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Management of State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 2. 2.The Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees' Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvalluvar Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to pay the petitioner interest at the rate of 18 percentage per annum, the period of delay from 01.12.2021 to 26.03.2023 in paying the amounts paid towards his terminal / pension benefits, namely, EPF Employees Contribution, Gratuity and Commuted Value of Pension within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court and without affecting his right to claim balance amounts towards those benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arunachalam For Respondents : Mr.K.Senthil Kumar Standing Counsel for R.1 Mr.S.C.Herold Singh Standing Counsel for R.2
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.