Madras High Court
The Management Of Tamil Nadu vs G. Duraikannu on 19 April, 2022
W.A.No.849 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 19/4/2022
CORAM
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN
and
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Writ Appeal No.849 of 2022
1. The Management of Tamil Nadu
State Transport Corporation
(Villupuram Division – II) Ltd
rep. By its b Managing Director
Rangapuram
Vellore 9.
2. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
Employee Pension Trust
rep. By its Administration
Pallavan Salai
Chennai 600 002. ... Appellants
Vs
G. Duraikannu ... Respondent
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set
aside the order, dated 17/3/2021, made in W.P.No.12356 of 2004.
For Appellants ... Mr.G.Saravanakumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.A.No.849 of 2022
-----
JUDGMENT
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ,J
The present appeal has been preferred against the order, dated
17/3/2021, made in W.P.No.12356 of 2004, allowing the writ petition as
prayed for, in the light of the following directions, viz.,
“1. The employer is directed to grant the
benefit of continuity of service to the workman and
consequently, compute the length of service, make
the necessary contribution to enable the workman to
receive pension and such contribution for the period
of non employment shall be calculated, as per Rules.
2. The above exercise shall be carried out by
the respondent/Corporation within a period of two
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.849 of 2022
2. The admitted case hereunder is that the writ petitioner joined the
service as a Conductor, in 1963 and absorbed in service and thereafter, for
his misconduct, he was dismissed from service, on 19/10/1981. After the
failure of conciliation, Industrial Dispute was adjudicated by the labour
Court as I.D.No.628 of 1990 and the award was passed, on 26/7/1993,
directing the Management to reinstate the workman, with continuity of
service and other attendant benefits, but without backwages, holding that
termination was not justified. The writ petitioner was reinstated in service,
pursuant to the award dated 29/3/1994. On attaining the age of
superannuation, on 31/5/2001, the writ petitioner was granted gratuity and
other terminal benefits for the entire service from 1981. In the light of the
Pension Scheme introduced in 1998 for which Rules have been formulated
in the year 2000, the Management took a stand that they will not be in a
position to make contribution towards Provident Fund, for the period of
non employment and after receiving the contribution of the employee, viz.,
the writ petitioner, once the award has become final, the entire wages have
got to be refixed and he preferred W.P.No.30928 of 2003, seeking for a
direction to pay pension for entire service, which was disposed of, on
20/2/2004, directing the Management to consider the representation, which
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.849 of 2022
was rejected, on 24/3/2004, stating the order was decided in the writ
petition, which is the subject matter of the writ appeal.
3. The learned Judge, after considering the pleadings of the parties,
came to the conclusion that once there is an award, even though backwages
have not been granted, and that continuity of service have been given, the
petitioner would be entitled to the benefits, for the purpose of getting
pension and that the employer will have to pay the contribution for the
period of non-employment to enable the employee to get the pensionary
benefits.
4. We are of the view that the observation made by the learned
Single Judge in paragraph No.9, which is extracted below, does not call for
any interference.
“It is to be seen that as per the direction
given by this Court in W.P.No.30928 of 2003 filed
by the petitioner, the impugned order has been
passed. As per the award of the labour Court, even
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.849 of 2022
though backwages not granted, continuity of
service has been granted. For continued length of
service, the petitioner is entitled for receiving
pension. This Court, time and again held in
various decisions that “once there is an award of
reinstatement with continuity of service, the entire
period of service will have to be taken into account
for all purposes except for paying backwages. It is
duty cast upon the employer to remit amount in the
PF account so as to enable the petitioner therein to
get pension.””
5. Hence, we sustain the order of the learned Single Judge and
expect the Management/first appellant, to settle the terminal benefits,
within a period of four months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order, failing which the arrears payable to the employee will carry the
interest rate at 6% p.a., from today.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.849 of 2022
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ,J
mvs.
6. With the above direction, this writ appeal is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
(S.V.N.,J) (M.S.Q.,J)
19 April 2022
th
Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order
Index : Yes/ No
Internet : Yes
mvs.
Writ Appeal No.849 of 2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
