Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

The General Manager vs Special Deputy Commissioner Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 943 Mad

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 943 Mad
Judgement Date : 24 January, 2023

Madras High Court
The General Manager vs Special Deputy Commissioner Of ... on 24 January, 2023
                                                                1/6                         W.A.No.156/2023

                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED :: 24-01-2023

                                                               CORAM

                                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

                                                                AND

                      THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD

                                                     W.A.No.156 of 2023

            The General Manager,
            Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
            (Villupuram) Ltd.,
            Vellore Region,
            Vellore – 632 009.                 ...                         Appellant

                                                         -vs-

            1.Special Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Chennai,
              D.M.S.Compound,
              Chennai-06.

            2.K.Deenadayalan                             ...               Respondents

                                  Appeal is filed under under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the
            order, dated 05.04.2022, passed in W.P.No.28178 of 2013, on the file of this Court.


                                  For Appellant : Mr.M.Aswin

                                  For Respondent 2 : No appearance




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                             2/6                           W.A.No.156/2023



                                                        JUDGMENT

This appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned single

Judge, dated 05.04.2022, passed in W.P.No.28178 of 2013.

2. The second respondent employee was dismissed from service on

15.06.2011 for causing an accident. As the industrial dispute was pending between the

management and the union, the appellant employer filed an application before the

authority concerned under Section 33 (2) (b) of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947,

seeking approval of their action in dismissing the second respondent employee.

3. The main contention of the appellant was that when the second

respondent employee had committed a serious misconduct and his past record was very

bad, the question of his reinstatement would not arise. However, they would submit

that there was a shortfall in payment of certain allowances and that would not entitle

him to get the same, as he was not in service.

4. When the order of dismissal was passed on 15.06.2011, one month's

salary payable on 15.06.2011 was to be paid and the appellant employer paid the salary

of the second respondent employee for the month of March in the month of June and,

therefore, there was a shortfall. For the sake of convenience, the salary drawn by the

second respondent employee for the month of March,2011, and payable in the month of

April, 2011, is extracted below :


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                 3/6                              W.A.No.156/2023



                                  Basic Pay        -               Rs.8560/-
                                  Grade Pay        -               Rs.1900/-
                                  Dearness Allowance         -     Rs.4707/-
                                  House Rent Allowance       -     Rs.540/-
                                  Medical Allowance          -     Rs,100/-
                                  Attendance Allowance       -     Rs.50/-
                                  Laundry Allowance          -     Rs.80/-
                                                                   -----------
                                  Total                      -     Rs.15937/-
                                                                   ------------

5. In the order, the authority has, apart from extracting the wages payable to

the second respondent employee, categorically observed as follows :

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/6 W.A.No.156/2023

6. The authority has considered the question of shortfall of payment by

framing a question and held that there was a shortfall of Rs.608.80. The contention of

the appellant that certain allowances like Laundry are not included for the purpose of

computing one month's salary cannot be accepted.

7. For the sake of reference, Section 2 (rr) of the Industrial Disputes

Act,1947, which defines the term ''wages'', is extracted below :

''2[(rr) “wages” means all remuneration capable of being expressed in terms of money, which would, if the terms of employment, expressed or implied, were fulfilled, be payable to a workman in respect of his employment, or of work done in such employment, and includes-

(i) such allowances (including dearness allowance) as the workman is for the time being entitled to;

(ii) the value of any house accommodation, or of supply of light, water, medical attendance or other amenity or of any service or of any concessional supply of foodgrains or other articles;

(iii) any travelling concession;

(iv) any commission payable on the promotion of sales or business or both; but does not include- (a) any bonus; (b) any contribution paid or payable by the employer to any pension fund or provident fund or for the benefit of the workman under any law for the time being in force; (c) any gratuity payable on the termination of his service.''

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/6 W.A.No.156/2023

8. The definition includes all allowances that are payable to the employee

and they are no exception. Since allowances payable to the employee fall within the

inclusive definition, we are of the view that there is a shortfall in one month's payment

of salary. The authority has rendered a finding of fact, which has been rightly upheld by

the learned single Judge.

9. We do not find any merit in this appeal and it is, accordingly, dismissed.

The amount payable to the second respondent employee along with all other benefits

shall be paid by the appellant management within a period of four months from the date

of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already paid. No costs. Consequently, the

connected C.M.P.No.1481 of 2023 also stands dismissed.



            Index : Yes/No                                                       (S.V.N.,J.)     (J.S.N.P.,J.)
            Internet : Yes/No                                                           24-01-2023
            Speaking / Non-speaking Order
            dixit



            To

Special Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Chennai, D.M.S.Compound, Chennai-06.




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                  6/6                           W.A.No.156/2023




                                        S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.
                                        AND
                                        J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD,J.



                                                                         dixit




                                           W.A.No.156 of 2023




                                                24-01-2023




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

 
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