Madras High Court
N.Sivalingam vs The Chairman Cum Managing ... on 4 July, 2023
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.07.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
and M.P.No.1 of 2013
N.Sivalingam ...Petitioner
-Vs-
1. The Chairman cum Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporations,
No.12, Tambusamy Road,
Kilpauk, Chennai – 10.
2. The Regional Manager,
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies
Corporation,
N.G.R. Magar.
S.R.C. Mill Compound,
Tiruppur – 1. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire
records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in
his proceedings Rc.No.AGR5/19610/12, dated 19.06.2012 and quash the
same and consequently directing the respondents to pay the interest at the
rate of 18% per annum on the belated payment of gratuity period from
31.03.2011 to 08.06.2012 to the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 8
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam
For Respondents : No appearance
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order
passed by the first respondent in his proceedings Rc.No.AGR5/19610/12,
dated 19.06.2012, thereby rejected the claim of the interest for the
belated payment of gratuity amount.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Quality Inspector
in the respondents corporation on 05.01.1976. Subsequently he was
promoted as Quality Inspector and due to attainment of superannuation,
he was permitted to retire from service by a communication dated
31.03.2011, without prejudice to pending storage loss, transit loss,
vigilance cell, audit recovery, monetary value of punishment inflicted,
pending storage loss proposals, audit objections, recovery and recovery if
any for the un-audit period.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
submit that there was no charge made as against the petitioner except the
alleged storage loss to the tune of Rs.1.47 lakhs, that too the said charge
has not been proved by way of any enquiry. Further the gratuity cannot
be withheld and the petitioner was not paid the gratuity settlement
immediately after his retirement. There was a delay of more than 14
months to disburse the gratuity amount. Therefore, the petitioner was
entitled for interest for the belated payment of gratuity amount for the
period from 31.03.2011 to 08.06.2012. However, the first respondent
without considering the above facts and circumstances mechanically
rejected the claim of the petitioner.
4. He further submitted that even assuming that the petitioner
is facing any charges in respect of storage loss, no proceedings has been
initiated as against the petitioner so far and no order has been passed to
recover any amount from the petitioner. In support of his contention, he
relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in
W.A.No.562 of 2020, dated 28.10.2020 in the case of V.Pandian Vs.
The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies and ors.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
Though the respondents were served notice and engaged counsel, no one
is present today and they failed to file any counter.
6. Admittedly, the petitioner was permitted to retire from his
service as Quality Inspector, by communication dated 25.03.2011
without prejudice to pending storage loss, transit loss, vigilance cell, audit
recovery, monetary value of punishment inflicted, pending storage loss
proposals, audit objections, recovery and recovery if any for the un-audit
period. Further these conditions are imposed in all other employees while
they retire from service.
7. That apart, even till now, there is no evidence to show that
the petitioner is facing any charges for storage loss of any other recovery
from the petitioner. Even assuming that if any storage loss or recovery
from the petitioner, the first respondent cannot withhold the gratuity
amount which is entitled by the petitioner.
8. Now the only question to be decided in this Writ Petition is
that whether the petitioner is entitled for interest on the belated payment
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
of gratuity?
9. Section 7(3A) of the Payment of Gratuity Act itself makes
the provisions for payment of interest and makes the provisions of
settlement any such dispute under the Act. Thus there is clear mandate in
the provisions of Section 7 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, to the
employer for payment of gratuity within time and to pay interest on the
delayed payment of gratuity. There is also provision to recovery the
amount of gratuity with compound interest in case amount of gratuity
payable was not paid by the employer in terms of Section 8 of the
Payment of Gratuity Act, since the employer did not satisfy the
mandatory requirement of the proviso to Section 7(3A) of the Payment of
Gratuity Act, no discretion was left to deny the interest to the appellant
on belated payment of gratuity.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
10. In the case on hand, admittedly the respondent paid gratuity
amount only on 08.06.2012, after the period of 14 months from the date
of petitioner's superannuation. Therefore, the petitioner shall be entitled
for the interest at the rate of 8% per annum on the belated payment of
gratuity for the period from 31.03.2011 to 08.06.2012.
11. Accordingly the impugned order dated 19.06.2012, passed
by the first respondent in Rc.No.AGR5/19610/12, is hereby set aside.
The first respondent is directed to pay interest at the rate of 8% (eight
percentage) per annum on the belated gratuity amount to the petitioner
for the period from 31.03.2011 to 08.06.2012, within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
12. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands allowed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be
no order as to cost.
04.07.2023
Internet: Yes
Index : Yes/No
Speaking/Non Speaking order
rts
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
To
1. The Chairman cum Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporations,
No.12, Tambusamy Road,
Kilpauk, Chennai – 10.
2. The Regional Manager,
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies
Corporation,
N.G.R. Magar.
S.R.C. Mill Compound,
Tiruppur – 1.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,
rts
W.P.No.12547 of 2013
and M.P.No.1 of 2013
04.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
