Madras High Court
A.Nazmudeen vs The Tamil Nadu State Transport on 13 July, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 13.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
A.Nazmudeen ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
Madurai - 625 016.
2. The Administrator,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
Employees Pension Fund Trust,
Thiruvalluvar Illam,
Chennai - 02.
... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order of
this Court made in W.P.(MD) No.6828 of 2021, dated 25.03.2021.
For Appellant : Mr.Ajay Khose for Mr.A.Rahul
For Respondents : Mr.J.Senthil Kumaraiah for R1
Mr.A.Swaminathan for R2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/7
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
We have heard Mr.Ajay Khose, learned counsel for Mr.A.Rahul,
learned counsel appearing for the appellant; Mr.J.Senthil Kumaraiah, learned
counsel appearing for the first respondent and Mr.A.Swaminathan, learned
counsel appearing for the second respondent.
2. The appellant filed the writ petition praying for a direction upon the
respondents to pay interest at the rate of 18% per annum for the belated
payment of petitioner's terminal benefits including Gratuity, Terminal Leave
Salary, Provident Fund and Commuted Value of Pension from the date of his
retirement to till the date on which the benefits are settled.
3. Identical issue was considered by us in W.A(MD).Nos.1349 and
1350 of 2021, dated 12.07.2021. In the said case also the writ petition filed by
the workmen for similar relief was dismissed. We have allowed the appeal filed
by the workman in part by assigning the following reasons:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
"The appellants who are the retired workmen of the
respondent Corporation are not aggrieved by the entirety of the
impugned order, but only insofar as it has declined the payment
of interest on the belated payment of Provident Fund and
Earned Leave Salary. Undisputed facts are that the appellant
V.Rajendran retired during June 2019 and the appellant
S.Gnanasekaran retired in April 2019 and their retirement
benefits were settled only on 30.01.2021. So far as the gratuity
is concerned, since it is a reward for the past services and not a
bounty, statutorily the respondent Corporation is bound to pay
interest. Therefore, the learned Single Bench rightly directed
for payment of interest at 6% p.a. on the belated payment of
gratuity.
5.So far as the Provident Fund and Earned Leave Salary
are concerned, the learned Single Bench has denied the same on the
ground of pandemic. This, in our considered view, is untenable
because, the Provident Fund and Earned Leave Salary have also
been held to be retirement benefits and any delay in settling the same
would attract interest payable for the delay. The decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.K.Dua Vs. State of Haryana and
another in Civil Appeal No.184 of 2008 dated 09.01.2008, will
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
come to the aid and assistance of the appellants. Therefore, we are
of the clear view that the delay in payment of Provident Fund and
Earned Leave Salary also to be compensated by payment of interest,
which we fix at 6% p.a. It is submitted before us that insofar as
appellant Rajendran, the retirement benefits were settled 21 months
after he retired and insofar as Gnanasekaran, it was settled after 19
months he retired from service.
6.In the light of the above, these Writ Appeals are allowed
and that portion of the impugned orders declining grant of interest
on belated payment of Provident Fund and Earned Leave Salary is
set aside and the respondent Corporation is directed to pay interest
at the rate of 6% p.a. for the period of delay. This direction be
complied with within a period of six [6] weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy this judgment. However, there shall be no order as
to costs."
4. The case on hand is not different from the case referred supra.
Therefore, applying the above decision, this Writ Appeal is allowed and the
respondent is directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the
Terminal Leave Salary, Provident Fund and Commuted Value of Pension from
the date of his retirement to till the date on which the benefits are settled to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
appellant at the rate of 6% per annum.
5. This direction be complied with within a period of six weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs.
Index :Yes/No (T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
Internet :Yes/No 13.07.2021
pkn
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.
To:
1. The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.,
Madurai - 625 016.
2. The Administrator,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
Employees Pension Fund Trust,
Thiruvalluvar Illam,
Chennai - 02.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
13.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1354 of 2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
