Madras High Court
The Management vs The Principal Labour Court on 9 October, 2023
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.10.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
and
C.M.P.No.20250 of 2023
The Management,
Rep. by its Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation,
(Villupuram Division II) Limited,
Rangapuram, Vellore 632009. .. Appellant
...vs...
1. The Principal Labour Court,
Vellore, Vellore District.
P.Munusamy (died)
2. Arputham
3. Shabina
4. M.Ashok
5. Asha
6. Usha
7. Divya .. Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order
dated 21.02.2023 passed in W.P.No.25489 of 2009.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
For Appellant : Mr.S.Pavithra
For Respondents : Mr.V.Subramani
***
JUDGMENT
(JUDGMENT of the Court was delivered by S.VAIDYANATHAN, J)
Challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 21.02.2023 in
W.P.No.25489 of 2009, the Management has preferred the above Writ Appeal.
2. On 05.09.2023, this Court made the following suggestion:
“This is an appeal by the Transport Corporation. The workman
breathed his last on 30.11.2017, i.e., during the pendency of the writ
petition, and his legal heirs are on record.
2 Mr. Sivaraman, learned counsel, accepts notice for RR 2
to 7 who are the legal heirs of the deceased workman.
3 Heard Mrs. S. Pavithra, learned Standing Counsel for the
Transport Corporation and Mr. Sivaraman, learned counsel for the
legal heirs of the deceased workman.
4 The only ground based on which the award of the Labour
Court has been interfered with by the Single Bench is that eyewitness
to the accident was not examined in the domestic enquiry. But, be it
noted, in the light of the judgments of the Supreme Court in State of
Haryana and another v Rattan Singh (1977) 2 SCC 491 and J.D.
Jain v The Management of State Bank of India AIR 1982 (SC) 673,
hearsay evidence is permissible in a domestic enquiry. That apart,
from the documents available before us, it is very clear that the
workman had involved in as many as 13 misconducts, including 2 fatal
accidents, for which, he was also inflicted with punishments. Since the
workman is no more and his legal heirs are on record, we suggested to
the Management as to whether the actual service about two decades
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
rendered by the workman from 23.05.1981 to 25.11.2000 can be taken
into account for the purpose of award of Gratuity and Family Pension.
Post on 14.09.2023.”
2. Pursuant to the aforesaid suggestion made by this Court, the issue was placed
before the Board of the Transport Corporation and the decision to extend the pension
applicable for the actual services rendered by the workman vide communication dated
30.09.2023, addressed by the General Manager of the appellant Transport Corporation
to the Standing Counsel, to that effect has been produced before this Court. For the
sake of ease of reference, the same is scanned and reproduced as under:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
3. The learned counsel for the workman submitted that he has no objection for
accepting the total commitment, however, interest on the same may be directed to be
paid.
4. Be it noted, it is not a case of normal retirement. It is no doubt true that there is
no cessation of employer - employee relationship and gratuity and Provident Fund
amount due will have to be released unless it is withheld for the purpose of recovery. In
this case, the Management had taken a decision that the Workman is not entitled to any
relief. However, pursuant to the suggestion made by this Court, it has confined the
relief only to one of compulsory retirement. As already stated, as the Provident Fund
amount and gratuity amount have been agreed to be settled by the Transport
Corporation on the suggestion made by this Court, the question of granting interest does
not arise. Further, since the Management has agreed to extend pensionary benefits to
the workman vide letter dated 30.09.2023 extracted above, the order of the learned
Single Judge qua pensionary benefits, is modified to that effect. It is made clear that
since Gratuity has already been agreed to be paid by the Transport Corporation, the
same shall not be recovered.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
This Writ Appeal stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[S.V.N., J.,] [K.R.S., J]
09.10.2023
Index: Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
arr
To
The Principal Labour Court,
Vellore, Vellore District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
S. VAIDYANATHAN,J.,
and
K.RAJASEKAR,J
arr
W.A.No.2418 of 2023
09.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
