P.Buvaneswari vs The Managing Director
2022 Latest Caselaw 1316 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 1316 Mad
Judgement Date : 28 January, 2022

Madras High Court

P.Buvaneswari vs The Managing Director on 28 January, 2022

                                                                            W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022


                             BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                  DATED : 28.01.2022

                                                      CORAM:

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

                                                W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022

                     P.Buvaneswari
                     Superintendent (Retired)                            ... Petitioner

                                                        versus


                     1. The Managing Director,
                        Tamil Nadu State Transport
                        Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited.,
                        Corporate Office,
                        Kumbakonam-612 001.

                     2. The General Manager,
                        Tamil Nadu State Transport
                        Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.,
                        Trichy Region,
                        Tiruchirappalli-620 001.

                     3.The Chief Financial Officer,
                       The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
                       (Kumbakonam) Limited,
                       Corporate Office,
                       Kumbakonam-612 001.                               ... Respondents




                     1/9



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                        W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022


                                  Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                     seeking for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to
                     settle the petitioner's Surrender Leave Salary for 66 days, in respect of the
                     years 2010-2019 together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum payable
                     from the date of retirement to till the date of actual payment.


                                        For Petitioner    : Mr.Senthil Kumar

                                        For Respondents :    Mr.D.Sivaraman
                                                             Standing Counsel

                                                             ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for a Mandamus, directing the

respondents to settle the Surrender Leave Salary to the petitioner for 66

days, in respect of the years 2010-2019 together with interest at the rate of

18% per annum payable from the date of retirement till the date of actual

payment.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

was not paid surrender leave salary for 66 days, for the years from 2010 to

2019. When the petitioner approached the respondents, they informed that

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022

it will be settled soon. However, till date, no leave salary was paid to the

petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. The petitioner would submit that he has already made a

representation dated 15.11.2021 in this regard, which is said to be pending.

If the said representation is directed to be disposed of within stipulated time,

the ends of justice could be secured.

4. Whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority to

redress the claim of the employee, there is a duty cast upon the authorities to

consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way

or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. Such an inaction

would amount to dereliction of duties and thereby this Court would be

justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of

Constitution of India and thereby direct such authority to consider the

representation within the stipulated time.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022

5. An identical issue with regard to the surrender leave salary came up

for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in W.A(MD) No.

210 of 2019 and the Hon'ble Division Bench by judgment dated 04.09.2019

had upheld the view of the learned Single Judge against which the writ

appeal came to be filed and also rejected the Corporation plea that the

employee had not claimed the encashment of the surrender leave within the

stipulated time. The relevant portion of the said order reads as follows:-

“2. This appeal is filed by the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kumbakonam Division. The respondent filed W.P(MD).No.2449 of 2018 praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the order dated 21.12.2017 and direct the appellants to settle the petitioner's surrender leave salary. The appellant Corporation resisted the claim by contending that even though as per the settlement entered into under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Dispute Act, the employee is entitled for surrendering and encashing 15 days in one year or 30 days in two years, the same has not been done by the writ petitioner during his service during 2011-2014 and after superannuation only in the year 2016, he has made a claim of surrender of earn leave, based on the circular issued by the appellant Corporation, dated

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022

09.01.2017. Further, it is submitted that the circular is not meant for enabling the retired employees to renew their claim of surrendering their earned leave of 15 days in a year during the service i.e., between 2011-2014 and it is applicable only for existing employees. Therefore, it is submitted that the respondent/writ petitioner cannot lay his claim based upon the circular, dated 09.01.2017.

                                        3.The       learned   counsel     appearing      for     the
                                  respondent/writ     petitioner   submitted   that    though    the

petitioner superannuated on 31.05.2016, from the year 2011 onwards, the said practice of surrendering 15 days or 50% of the earn leave per year was done away by the appellants Corporation on account of financial crises. Further, the action based on the settlement entered into under Section 12(3) of the Act was not available to the respondent/writ petitioner, because the appellants Transport Corporation is citing financial crisis. The learned Single Judge took into consideration the facts placed before him and also noted the circular dated 09.01.2017 and taking note of the fact that there is record to show that the appellants transport corporation pleaded financial crises for non-settling the surrender leave salary, allowed the writ petition.

4.While doing so, the Writ Court referred to an earlier order in the case of A.Sundararajan Vs., Tamil Nadu State of

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022

Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam Limited) [W.P(MD).No.24245 of 2016 etc batch], wherein similar relief sought for has been granted and the writ petitions were allowed and the appellants Transport Corporation was directed to implement the same. Thus in our considered view, the learned Single Judge has rightly gone into the factual position and took note of stand of the appellants corporation as to why earlier they did not permit surrender and allowed the writ petition. Therefore, we find that the appellants have not made out any ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge.”

6. In the light of the above, this Court is of the view that the petitioner

would be entitled to claim salary for the surrender leave.

7. For all the forgoing reasons, although the petitioner has made a

representation dated 15.11.2021, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh

representation, enclosing a copy of this order, seeking for settlement of his

surrender leave salary and on receipt of the such representation, the

respondents herein shall consider the same and disburse the eligible leave

salary through four equal monthly installments in the light of the aforesaid

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.1496 of 2022

Division Bench Judgment. The respondents shall ensure that the first

installment is disbursed at least within a period of four weeks from the date

of receipt of fresh representation along with a copy of this order.