G.Shanmugam vs The Tamil Nadu State Transport ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6711 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6711 Mad
Judgement Date : 31 March, 2022

Madras High Court

G.Shanmugam vs The Tamil Nadu State Transport ... on 31 March, 2022

                                                                             W.P.(MD).No.5880 of 2022


                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                               DATED:31.03.2022

                                                      CORAM:

                        THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

                                             W.P.(MD).No.5880 of 2022

                     G.Shanmugam                                                ... Petitioner

                                                      vs.

                     1.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.,
                       Represented by its Managing Director,
                       Kumbakonam.

                     2.The General Manager,
                       The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.,
                       Karaikudi Region,
                       Karaikudi .                                       ... Respondents

                     PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
                     India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent to
                     settle petitioner's surrender leave salary of Rs.2,14,680/- for 142 days
                     together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum payable from the date
                     of his retirement to till the date of actual payment.


                                  For Petitioner            : Mr. A.Rahul
                                  For Respondents           : Mr. D.Sivaraman




                     1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                  W.P.(MD).No.5880 of 2022




                                                           ORDER

Seeking a direction to the respondents to settle petitioner's

surrender leave salary of Rs.2,14,680/- for 142 days together with

interest at the rate of 6% per annum payable from the date of his

retirement to till the date of actual payment, the petitioner is before this

Court with the present writ petition.

2.By consent of both sides, the writ petition itself is taken up for

final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

3.According to the petitioner, he retired from service on

28.02.2019 on attaining the age of superannuation. As on the date of

retirement, there are 142 days earned leave and he is entitled to encash

the same. Though he retired as early as on 28.02.2019, the said payment

has not been paid so far. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation

to the respondents, but the same has not been considered so far and

hence, the petitioner is before this Court. In this regard, the learned

counsel for the petitioner referred to the Division Bench judgment of this

Court made in W.A.(MD) Nos.1883 to 1892 of 2021 dated 04.10.2021.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.5880 of 2022

4.On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents would

submit that no doubt, the petitioner is entitled for earned leave salary of

142 days. However, since the respondent Corporation is in financial

crisis, the same could not be paid and he seeks some time by way of

installment. Further he would submit that some employees were retired

during COVID-19 pandemic situation and in those cases, he would

submit that interest need not be awarded.

5.Admittedly, the petitioner was permitted to retire from service on

28.02.2019 on attaining the age of superannuation and that the petitioner

is entitled for the earned leave salary. Though the learned counsel for the

respondents accepted that the petitioner is entitled to earned leave salary,

he disputes only interest portion.

6.The Division Bench of this Court in the case cited supra has held

as follows:

“8.When the appellant is liable to pay the surrender leave salary on the retirement of their employees, the delay in making payment of the leave

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.5880 of 2022

salary is solely because of the appellants' inaction. The first respondent writ petitioner cannot be penalized for the wrong done by the appellant. Hence, the award of 6% interest on the surrender leave salary by the learned single Judge is perfectly correct. We do not find any ground to interfere with the orders passed by the learned single Judge. The writ appeals are devoid of merits and the same are dismissed. However, we make it clear that the reliefs granted by the learned single Judge in the writ petitions are confined only to the first respondent/writ petitioners, who have filed the writ petitions. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous Petitions are closed.”

7.The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Jharkhand

and others v. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava (2013) 12 SCC 210, held that

the retirement benefits of an employee are not bounty, but property and

withholding of such benefits, without due process of law, is violative of

Article 300(A) of the Constitution of India.

8.The Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court in several

occasions have held that when there is a delay in payment of retirement

benefits, the employee is entitled for payment along with interest.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.5880 of 2022

9.In view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as

well as the Division Bench of this Court, this Court is of the view that the