Madras High Court
The Management Of Tamil Nadu vs T.Venkatasubramanian .. 1St on 7 June, 2023
WA(MD)No.563 of 2013
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.06.2023
CORAM
The Honourable Mr. Justice R.SURESH KUMAR
and
The Honourable Mr. Justice K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN
WA .(MD)Nos.563 to 567 of 2013
and
M.P.Nos.1 to 1 and 2 to 2 of 2013
The Management of Tamil Nadu
State Transport Corporation
Ltd., Madurai Region
Rep. by its General Manager
Madurai. .. Appellant in all
WA Nos.563 to 565
1.The Managing Director,
Tamilnadu State Transport
Corporation (Madurai) Limited
Byepass Road, Madurai.
2.TamilNadu State Transport
Corporation (Madurai) Limited,
Nagercoil Region
Rep. by its Assistant Manager, (Pension/P.F)
Rani Thottam, Nagercoil. ... Appellants in
WA Nos.566&567/2013
Vs.
1.T.Venkatasubramanian .. 1st Respondent in
WA.No.563/2013
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)No.563 of 2013
1.S.Ganapathy .. 1st Respondent in
WA No.564/2013
1.R.Devaraj ..1st Respondent in
WA No.565/2013
1.A.Rengasamy Asari .. 1st Respondent in
WA No.566/2013
1.P.Sami Asari .. 1st respondent in
WA No.567/2013
2.The Administrator
TNSTC Employees Pension Fund Trust,
Thiruvalluvar House
Pallavan Salai
Chennai 2 .. 2nd Respondent
in all appeals
Appeals are filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act against the
order dated 15.06.2009 passed by this Court in WP(MD) Nos.2406, 2408,
2410, 1829 and 1830 of 2009.
For Appellants : Mr.K.Mahendran
For Respondents : Mr.A.Rahul for R1 in
WA(MD) No.565/2013
No appearance for the respondents
in WA(MD) Nos.563, 564, 566
and 567/2013
COMMON JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.]
These writ appeals have been directed against the common order
passed by the writ Court dated 15.06.2009 in the respective writ petition.
Page 2 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)No.563 of 2013
2. In those writ petitions, the respondent workmen, who are the
employees of the appellant Transport Corporation at various divisions, had
sought for commuted value of pension with interest at 18% per annum,
since that was not given, they were made to approach this Court by filing
the writ petition in a batch of cases.
3. Hearing the parties, the learned Judge was of the view that whether
the retired employees of the transport corporation would be entitled to get
interest as well as commuted value of pension in one lumpsum has already
been decided in number of cases and therefore, those employees would be
entitled to get commuted value of pension with interest. Therefore, the
respective writ petitions were allowed by the impugned order dated
15.06.2009 by the writ Court.
4. In this context, when these writ appeals were taken up for hearing,
the learned standing counsel for the appellant Corporation has endorsed the
statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent workmen that
during the pendency of these intra court appeals, the appellant transport
corporation had respectively come forward to make settlement to each of the
Page 3 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)No.563 of 2013
workman and according to the instructions he has received, the due payable
by way of commuted value of pension as well as the calculated interest had
already been paid to all the respondent workmen. Therefore, virtually,
nothing survives in these writ appeals, he contended. The said submission of
the learned counsel for the respondents is not controverted by the learned
standing counsel for the appellants.
5. In view of the aforesaid submission, by recording the submissions
of the learned counsel for the appellant and respondents, we feel that no
further adjudication is required in these intra-Court appeals. Hence, these
intra-court appeals are disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently
connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
(R.S.K.,J.) (K.K.R.K.,J.)
07.06.2023
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
RR
Page 4 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA(MD)No.563 of 2013
R.SURESH KUMAR,J.
and
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN,J.
RR
WA.(MD)Nos.563 to 567 of 2013
07.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
