The General Manager vs T.Jeyapaul
2023 Latest Caselaw 15302 Mad

Madras High Court

The General Manager vs T.Jeyapaul on 29 November, 2023

Author: S.M.Subramaniam

Bench: S.M.Subramaniam

                                                                              W.A.(MD)No.583 of 2019


                            BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                             DATED : 29.11.2023

                                                    CORAM:

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
                                                     AND
                          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

                                           W.A.(MD)No.583 of 2019
                                                    and
                                     C.M.P.(MD)Nos.4797 and 5110 of 2019

                The General Manager,
                Madurai District Cooperative Milk
                      Producers Union Ltd.,
                Madurai-20.                                                ... Appellant

                                                     Vs.

                1.T.Jeyapaul

                2.The Managing Director,
                  Tamilnadu Cooperative Milk
                      Producers Federation Ltd.,
                  Revenue Department,
                  Avin Illam, Mathavapuram,
                  Milk Colony, Chennai.

                3.The Accounts Officer,
                  Tamil Nadu Cooperative Milk
                      Producers Federation Ltd.,
                  Employees Gratuity Fund Trust,
                 Avin Illam, Mathavapuram,
                  Milk Colony, Chennai.                                    ...Respondents

                1/5


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                          W.A.(MD)No.583 of 2019




                PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters patent, against the order made
                in W.P.(MD)No.6966 of 2015 dated 12.03.2019.


                                           For Appellant      : Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam
                                           For R1             : Mr.J.Lawrance
                                           For R2 & R3        : No Appearance


                                                           JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)

This writ appeal is directed against the orders dated 12.03.2019 in W.P.

(MD)No.6966.

2.The first respondent instituted the writ proceedings challenging the

order dated 20.08.2014 rejecting the claim of the first respondent to grant interest

for the belated settlement of gratuity.

3.The learned single Judge directed the respondents in the writ

proceedings to consider the claim of the writ petitioner based on his representation

dated 31.10.2014 and pass appropriate orders on the same line as observed in the

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

order made in W.P.(MD)No.7022 of 2015, which was disposed of with a direction

to the respondents to pay the interest due.

4.The learned counsel for the appellant mainly contended that the private

respondents are not entitled for interest in view of Section 7(3A) of the Payment of

Gratuity Act. The delay had occurred at the instance of the employee concerned

and therefore, it is not necessary for the appellant to settle the interest for the

belated payment of gratuity.

5.The learned counsel for the writ petitioners states that under Section

7(2) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, the writ petitioners are entitled to claim

interest, because the management failed to deposit the gratuity amount with the

controlling authority.

6.This Court is of the view that in the event of administrative delay in

settling the gratuity, the private respondent is entitled for interest. If the delay had

occurred at the instance of the employee, then the employee is not entitled to claim

interest for the belated payment of gratuity. The issue in this regard is to be

decided based on the bylaws and by considering the merits of the matter. Further,

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

the learned Single Judge has only directed to consider the representation made by

the writ petitioner and pass appropriate orders.

7.In view of the above, we are not inclined to interfere with the order

impugned in this writ appeal. The appellant is directed to comply with the order

passed by the learned Single Judge within a period of six weeks from the date of

receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

                                                                   (S.M.S., J.) & (V.L.N., J.)
                                                                              29.11.2023
                                                                                (1/2)
                NCC      : Yes / No
                Index : Yes / No
                Internet : Yes / No

                ta







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



                                      S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
                                                             AND
                                  V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
                                                                  ta









                                                    29.11.2023
                                                          (1/2)







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