Madras High Court
R.Thanigaivel vs The Managing Director on 23 October, 2024
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N.Anand Venkatesh
W.P.No.29135 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.29135 of 2024
R.Thanigaivel .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Ltd.,
3/137, Salamedu,
Valudhareddy Post,
Villupuram – 605 602.
2.The General Manager,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Ltd.,
Kancheepuram Region,
Ponnerikarai,
Bangaluru National Highways,
Kancheepuram – 631 552. .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to
Letter No.2204/Nee.vi.pi/TNSTC/KPM/22 dated 12.09.2024 issued by
the 2nd respondent and to quash the same and consequently direct the
respondents to make payment of wages from 23.07.2018 to till date with
10% interest per annum or to direct the respondent to re-employ the
petitioner in any job other than the post of driver as ordered by the
Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.2204 of 2022 dated 25.04.2023.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/11
W.P.No.29135 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Ishak
For Respondents : Mr.R.Venkatesa Perumal
Standing Counsel
ORDER
This Writ Petition was filed challenging the impugned letter dated
12.09.2024 issued by the 2nd respondent and for a consequential direction
to the respondents to pay the wages from 23.07.2018 till date with
interest or in alternative to direct the respondent to re-employ the
petitioner in any post other than the post of driver as ordered by the
Division Bench in W.A.No.2204 of 2022 dated 25.04.2023.
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Standing Counsel for the respondents.
3.When the writ petition was taken up for hearing on 01.10.2024,
this Court passed the following order:
“Mr.Venkatesa Perumal, learned Standing
Counsel, takes notice for respondents.
2. The main grievance expressed by learned
counsel for petitioner is that the order passed by the
Division Bench in W.A.No.2204 of 2022, dated
25.04.2023, has been violated and the directions
have not been complied with.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. To appreciate the above submission,
paragraph No.10 of the order is extracted
hereunder:
"10. Recording the
affidavit so filed by the
first respondent, this court,
in order to give quietus to
the issue involved herein,
directs the appellant to
consider the claim of the
first respondent and pass
orders, either to pay wages
or to provide him any job
other than driver, on the
basis of the affidavit dated
20.04.2023 filed by the first
respondent as referred to
above. Such an exercise shall
be completed by the appellant
after providing an
opportunity of personal
hearing to the first
respondent, within a period
of eight weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this
judgment."
4. The impugned order dated 12.09.2024
passed by second respondent states as follows:
@ePjpkd;w cj;jutpd;goa[k;.
j';fsJ Ke;ija gzp
tuyhwpd;goa[k; 18/07/2024 md;W
234MtJ fHf eph;thf
,af;Feh; FG Kotpd;go
j';fSf;F kPz;Lk; Xl;Leh; gzp
tH';f tHp tifapy;iy
vd;gjhy;. j';fSf;F kPz;Lk;
Xl;Leh; gzp tH';fhky;;
ePjpkd;w cj;jut[fspd;go
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
j';;fSf;F 23/07/2018 Kjy;
29/07/2021 tiu rk;gsk; tH';f
,jd;K:yk; cj;jutplg;gLfpwJ/
,jd; bghUl;L j';fsJ
gzp milahs ml;il. Mjhh;
ml;il (Aadhar Card). ghd;
ml;il (Pan Card) Mfpatw;iw
mry; kw;Wk; efYld;
,t;tYtyfj;jpw;F VjhtbjhU
mYtyf ehspy; tUkhW
,jd;K:yk; nfl;Lf;
bfhs;sg;gLfpwJ/@
5. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted
that even though the petitioner has submitted the
relevant documents and had also undertaken to
forgo the back wages, the above order was passed.
6. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on
behalf of respondents shall take written instructions.
Based on the same, final orders will be passed in
this writ petition.
Post this writ petition at the end of the motion
list on 23.10.2024.”
4.When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned
Standing Counsel for the respondent Corporation produced written
instructions received from the 2nd respondent. The relevant portions are
extracted hereunder:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“As per the Hon'ble Court order, the
petitioner was called for personal hearing at
the regional office, Kancheepuram to ask him
job option to provide him any job other than
Driver job. But, he requested on the day by
representation dated 23.08.2023 to this
management requesting to provide Driver job
and forgo the backwages.
Again he represented by petition dated
03.11.2023 insisting the management to
provide Driver job.
In this regard, as per the Hon'ble Court
direction once again he was called in person at
the regional office and clearly enquired him
about the status of job option to provide him
whether any job other than Driver job, as such
he given his written representation dated
11.12.2023 to the management with request to
provide Driver job as he already requested
vide his representation dated 23.08.2023.
It is submitted that the petitioner
repeatedly represented to the respondent
management to provide Driver job without in
mind about the order of the Hon'ble Court in
the Hon'ble Division Bench directed to
consider to pay wage or any other job other
than Driver job.
In compliance with the Hon'ble Court's
directions, and petitioner's representations,
and personal hearing, and considering the
petitioner's past record, the corporation
started the official procedure to comply the
Hon'ble Court order, and placed the subject to
get approval from State Transport Undertaking
(STU) Board meeting (No.234) on 18.07.2024,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
where it was decided to pay the petitioner
wages for the period from 23.07.2018 to
29.07.2021 instead of providing him Driver job
as he represented finally.
The copies of his repeated
representations as to provide Driver job are
enclosed herewith for kind perusal.
As per the Hon'ble Court order, the
Approval Petition rejection order was set aside
on the date of Writ Petition final order, as
such, it was confirmed by the Hon'ble Division
Bench. Accordingly as per Writ Court order,
the wages eligible only for the period from the
date of Approval Petition rejection
(23.07.2018) till W.P. final order (29.07.2021),
and the same was confirmed by the Hon'ble
Division Bench. The petitioner not represented
or contested during the Writ Appeal case
hearing about the principle of “Doctrine of
merger” to make wages beyond the above said
period and upto the date of order of the
Hon'ble Division Bench that is 25.04.2023, and
this management obey the Hon'ble Court
orders and according to law not accept the
wages payment beyond the above said period.”
5.It is clear from the above that the Transport Corporation has now
taken a very specific stand that they are not willing to provide any job to
the petitioner and that they are willing to pay the wages as directed by
this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was not insisting for the driver job and was willing to take any
job by giving up his claim for backwages.
7.Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent
Corporation by producing the relevant records submitted that the
petitioner was continuously insisting for providing him the driver job. In
view of the same, the Transport Corporation came to a conclusion that
they will settle the wages of the petitioner as directed by this Court.
8.This Court does not want to get into the controversy as whether
the petitioner is insisting for driver job or the petitioner was willing to
take up any job by giving up his backwages. Ultimately, paragraph
No.10 of the Division Bench order governs the case as on today.
9.In view of the above, the stand taken by the respondent
Corporation is recorded and this Court holds that the petitioner will be
entitled for payment of wages.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10.The next controversy is with respect to the period for which the
wages will have to be paid to the petitioner. The learned Standing
Counsel appearing on behalf of the Transport Corporation submitted that
the petitioner will be entitled for the payment of wages from the date on
which the approval petition was rejected till the date of passing of the
order in W.P.No.13444 of 2021 dated 29.07.2021. Per contra, the learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order in the writ petition has
now merged with the order passed in the writ appeal on 25.04.2023.
Therefore, wages are payable from the date of rejection of the approval
petition till the date of passing of the final order in the writ appeal.
11.In the considered view of this Court, if the Transport
Corporation had not filed an appeal against the order passed by the
learned Single Judge, the petitioner would have been entitled for wages
from the date of rejection of the approval petition till the date of the
disposal of the writ petition on 29.07.2021. Since, the Transport
Corporation had chosen to file an appeal in W.A.No.2204 of 2022, the
order passed in the writ petition merges with the order passed in the writ
appeal and therefore, this Court holds that the petitioner will be entitled
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
for wages till 25.04.2023 when the writ appeal was disposed of.
12.In the light of the above discussions, this Court holds that the
petitioner will be entitled for the wages from the date of rejection of the
approval petition till the date of disposal of the writ appeal in
W.A.No.2204 of 2022 dated 25.04.2023. This amount shall be settled to
the petitioner by the respondent Corporation within a period of eight (8)
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the amount is
not settled within the time frame fixed by this Court, it will carry an
interest of 6% from the date of rejection of the approval petition till the
date of actual settlement of the amount.
13.In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the above
directions. No costs.
23.10.2024
krk
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
To
1.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Ltd.,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/137, Salamedu, Valudhareddy Post,
Villupuram – 605 602.
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
krk
2.The General Manager,
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Ltd.,
Kancheepuram Region,
Ponnerikarai,
Bangaluru National Highways,
Kancheepuram – 631 552.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
