Saturday, 09, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The Tamil Nadu State Transport ... vs M.Mahalingam
2021 Latest Caselaw 3297 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3297 Mad
Judgement Date : 10 February, 2021

Madras High Court
The Tamil Nadu State Transport ... vs M.Mahalingam on 10 February, 2021
                                                                   W.A(MD)No.1103 of 2014

                           BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                          DATED: 10.02.2021


                                                 CORAM:
                          THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
                                                 AND
                               THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL

                                       W.A(MD)No.1103 of 2014
                                               and
                                        M.P(MD)No.2 of 2014

                 1.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
                     (Kumbakonam) Limited,
                   Rep. by its Managing Director,
                   New Railway Station Road,
                   Kumbakonam,
                   Thanjavur District.          ... Appellant No.1/Respondent No.1


                 2.The General Manager,
                   Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
                       (Kumbakonam) Limited,
                   Trichy Region,
                   Tiruchirapalli.       ... Appellant No.2/Respondent No.2

                 3.The Administrator,
                   Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
                    Pension Fund Trust,
                   Thiruvalluvar House,
                   Pallavan Salai,
                   Chennai – 600 002.          ... Appellant No.3/Respondent No.3
                                                     Vs.

                 M.Mahalingam                 ... Respondent/Petitioner


                 Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against
                 the order dated 19.09.2013 in W.P(MD)No.14434 of 2013.



http://www.judis.nic.in
                 1/4
                                                                      W.A(MD)No.1103 of 2014

                               For Appellants         : Mr.D.Saravanan

                               For Respondent         : Mr.A.Rahul

                                                   JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.)

This Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 19.09.2013

passed in W.P(MD)No.14434 of 2013.

2. The writ petition was originally filed by the retired employee of

the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam Limited,

claiming his terminal benefits, which had not been paid to him despite

number of representations made by him. The writ petition was allowed by

the learned Single Judge on 19.09.2013, directing the appellants herein to

settle all the terminal benefits to the writ petitioner with 6% interest.

3. Aggrieved by the said order, the above writ appeal was filed by

the Transport Corporation. It is also stated that contempt petition in

Cont.P(MD)No.154 of 2014 was filed for the non-compliance of the order

passed in the writ petition.

4. When the writ appeal was taken up for hearing, the learned

counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that in the contempt

petition, it was already represented by the writ petitioner that the entire http://www.judis.nic.in

W.A(MD)No.1103 of 2014

terminal benefits due to him have been settled on various dates. The

same was recorded and the contempt petition was closed on 22.09.2014,

which was pursuant to the filing of the above writ appeals.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants has also

produced a Tabular Column, which would go to show that the writ

petitioner has been paid the terminal benefits with interest.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner/respondent

also acknowledges the same.

7. In view of the above, the writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous.

No Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.




                                                             [P.S.N.,J]   [S.K.,J.]
                                                                  10.02.2021
                 Index         :Yes/No
                 Internet      :Yes/No
                 pm




http://www.judis.nic.in

                                                                     W.A(MD)No.1103 of 2014

                                                           PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.
                                                                               and
                                                                     S.KANNAMMAL,J.

                                                                                        pm


                 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.

Judgment made in W.A(MD)No.1103 of 2014

10.02.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter