Madras High Court
Pokkuvarathu Kazhaka Oyvu Petra vs Tamil Nadu State Transport ... on 26 June, 2023
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
Pokkuvarathu Kazhaka Oyvu Petra
Aluvalar Nala Sangam, Kovai, (Regd.No.269/2011)
Rep., by its Secretary,
K.S.Shanmuga Velayutham,
B-25, Cheran Colony, Thudiyalur Post,
Coimbatore – 641 034. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
(Coimbatore Division)
Rep., by its Chariman cum
Additional Chief Secretary to Government,
Transport Department, Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
(Coimbatore Division)
Rep., by its Managing Director,
No.37, Mettu Palayam, Coimbatore – 641 043. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to pay the difference in
earned leave salary amount to the eligible 25 members of the petitioner Association
as per the members list enclosed herewith and as per the salary revised based on the
recommendation of the 6th pay Commission in the light of the orders passed by the
Madurai Division Bench of this Court in the similar cases in W.A.(MD)Nos.81 to 84
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
of 2018 dated 18.01.2018, W.A.(MD)Nos.716 of 2017 and 718 of 2017, dated
15.06.2017, W.A.(MD).Nos.1423 of 2016 dated 25.10.2017, W.A.(MD).Nos.1624 to
1627 of 2016 dated 01.09.2017 and W.A.(MD)No.270 of 2018 dated 22.02.2018
with 6% interest.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Soundar Raj
For Respondents : Mr.G.Nanmaran, for R1
Special Government Pleader
Mr.A.Sundaravadanam, for R2
ORDER
Heard Mr.Soundar Raj, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.G.Nanmaran,
learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and
Mr.A.Sundaravadanam, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent and
perused the material available on record.
2. With the consent of both side counsels, this writ petition is disposed of
at the stage of admission.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that after retirement of its members,
the respondents have not settled the earned leave salary and therefore, the petitioner
claims disbursement of the same to its members together with interest.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondents
submitted that the issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by various
orders of this Court including the order dated 13.12.2019 in the case of S.Alagesan
vs. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Kumbakonam) Ltd., and another in W.P.(MD).No.26487 of 2019. The relevant
portion of the order reads as follows:
"4.An identical issue 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 petition 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 orders reads as
follows:
'2.This appeal is filed by the Tamil Nadu
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
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
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 20112014 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
4.While doing so, the Writ Court referred to an
earlier order in the case of A.Sundararajan Vs., Tamil
Nadu State of 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.'
5. In the light of the above, this Court is of the view that the
petitioner would be entitled to claim salary for the surrendered
leave.”
5. By following the said order, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
by its Order dated 29.03.2021 in W.P.MD.No.7071/2021, allowed the said writ
petition with a direction to the respondents therein to settle the earned leave salary
together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of retirement till the
date of actual disbursement.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
6. Learned counsel appearing for the second respondent relied an order of
the Court dated 07.10.2021 in the case of A.Santhanamoorthi vs. The Principal
Secretary, Transport Department and another. The relevant portion of the said
order is reads as follows:
"3. It is noticed that though the above observation of the First
Bench of the Madurai Bench of this Court was followed by a learned
Single Judge in W.P.No.15886 of 2020 vide order dated 19.01.2021,
the learned Single Judge has subsequently modified the views in
W.P.No.506 of 2021 vide order dated 24.03.2021 considering the
constraints of the State Finance due to the outbreak of Covid-19 with
the following directions:
“(i) Respondent/Transport Corporation is
directed to pay interest @ 4% per annum to the
Petitioner for the belated payment of gratuity, leave
salary and communication of pension amount that are
yet to be settled, in six equal monthly instalments,
commencing 01.04.2021.
(ii) In case of delay in making instalments within
the time stipulated supra, with reference to the judgment
of the Division Bench of this Court (supra), interest
payable for the period of delay shall be at 6% per
annum.”
4. Considering the same, this Writ Petition is disposed by
directing the respondents to consider the representation dated
06.09.2021 of the petitioner and to pay interest at the rate of 4% per
annum for the belated payment of terminal benefits to the petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
in respect of Gratuity, Leave Salary, Provident Fund and other legal
dues to the petitioner in six equated monthly instalments commencing
from 1st November, 2021. No costs."
7. In view of the aforesaid decisions, this Court is of the view that the
members of the petitioner association herein are entitled for the relief sought in this
writ petition together with interest at the rate of 4%.
8. In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the following directions:
(i) there shall be a direction to the respondents herein to pay the
difference in earned leave salary amount to the eligible 25 members
of the petitioner Association with interest at the rate of 4% per annum
from the date of retirement till the date of actual disbursement.
(ii) the second respondent shall disburse the said amount to the
members of the petitioner Association, within a period of six weeks
from today.
10. There shall be no order as to costs.
26.06.2023
Index :Yes/No
Neutral Citation :Yes/No
AT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
AT
To
1.The Chariman cum Additional Chief Secretary to Government,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
(Coimbatore Division)
Transport Department, Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
(Coimbatore Division)
No.37, Mettu Palayam, Coimbatore – 641 043.
W.P.No.13862 of 2021
26.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
