Madras High Court
S.Ramamoorthy vs The Tamil Nadu State Transport on 22 December, 2021
W.P.(MD) No.16032 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.12.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P.(MD)No.16032 of 2018
S.Ramamoorthy ...Petitioner
Vs
1. The Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.,
Represented by its Managing Director,
Kumbakonam.
2. The General Manager,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.,
Kumbakonam Region,
Kumbakonam. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to
reconsider the punishment of increment cut for three years with cumulative
effect, imposed on the petitioner vide the order passed by the first
respondent in Ref”TNSTC/D10/Tha.Na./002/2009 dated 31.12.2009 based
on the judgment of acquittal passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate
No.III, Thanjavur dated 18.11.2014 in C.C.No.58 of 2011 and
_____________
Page No.1 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.16032 of 2018
consequently direct the respondents to pass orders re-fixing his pay and
terminal benefits and further directing the respondents to pay the
petitioner's difference amount in wages and difference amount in terminal
benefits within a time limit that may be stipulated by this court and pass
orders.
For Petitioner : Mr. A.Rahul
For Respondents : Mr. A.Balaji
for Mr.D.Sivaraman
Standing Counsel
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed by an employee of the Tamil Nadu
State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) seeking mandamus directing
the respondents to reconsider punishment of increment cut for three years
with cumulative effect imposed upon the petitioner.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the settlement arrived at under
Section 12 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, provided for a
reconsideration of the punishment imposed, if the criminal case pending as
against the petitioner ended in an honourable acquittal.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.16032 of 2018
3. Before me, Mr.Rahul, appearing for the petitioner and Mr.A.Balaji,
learned counsel for Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned Standing counsel appearing
for the Transport Corporation are not in agreement as to the nature of the
acquittal that has been obtained by the petitioner before the criminal court.
Thus, rather than delve into an interpretation of the judgment of the
criminal court, to decide as to whether the acquittal was honourable or
otherwise, it would suffice to direct the Transport Corporation to dispose
the representation of the petitioner dated 26.03.2018, wherein the same
request as, made before this Court has been made before the Corporation.
Let this exercise be done within a period of eight weeks from today after
hearing the petitioner. Disposed as above. No costs.
22.12.2021
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/non-speaking
Internet: Yes
mnr
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is
the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant
concerned.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.16032 of 2018
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
mnr
W.P.(MD)No.16032 of 2018
22.12.2021
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
