Madras High Court
D.Premkumar vs The Management on 17 March, 2025
W.P.No. 3426 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
Reserved on : 19.02.2025
Pronounced on : 17.03.2025
PRESENT:
THE HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE A.D. MARIA CLETE
W.P.No. 3426 of 2020
D.Premkumar,
S/o. Dorairaj,
No.3, 12-1, Madeswaran Koil Road,
Kuttayoor – 641 104 …Petitioner
Vs.
The Management,
Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation
(Coimbatore) Ltd,
Mettupalayam Road,
Coimbatore – 641 043 …Respondent
Prayer in the W.P.
To issue appropriate Writs, Orders or Directions and in particular issue a
Writ in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus after calling for the records
pertaining to the order dated 2.4.2019 passed the Hon’ble Principal Labour
Court, Coimbatore, in C.P.No.101/2017, quash the same and consequently
direct the respondent corporation to pay the petitioner a sum of
Rs.1,15,520/- towards difference in salary for the period from 1.7.2007 to
23.5.2009 and towards earned leave salary for that period, together with
interest at the rate of 12% from the date of due to the date of actual payment,
Award costs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
1 of 8
W.P.No. 3426 of 2020
Appearance of Parties:
For Petitioner : M/s. R.Krishnaswamy and V.AjayKhose, Advocates
For Respondent : M/s.A.Sundaravadhanam, M.Arun,A.Indumathi,
Advocates
JUDGMENT
Heard.
2. The Petitioner, a workman, has filed this writ petition challenging the
order of the Principal Labour Court, Coimbatore, dated 02.04.2019, in C.P.
No. 101 of 2017. By the impugned order, the Labour Court rejected his
claim for payment of salary from the date of regularization. The writ petition
was listed for admission on 12.02.2020, and notice was taken by the counsel
for the Respondent Corporation.
3. The circumstances leading to the filing of this writ petition are as
follows: The Petitioner, a workman, was employed as a driver in the
Respondent Transport Corporation on 19.08.2006. As per the settlement
between the union and the management, any worker who completed 240
days of service was eligible for regularization. Accordingly, on 23.05.2009,
the Respondent issued an order regularizing the services of the Petitioner
along with 11 other workmen. The order granted regularization with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
2 of 8
retrospective effect from 01.07.2007 and fixed the pay scale at Rs. 4,320 –
Rs. 601 – Rs. 4,800 – Rs. 65 – Rs. 5,775, with the Petitioner’s salary set at
Rs. 4,296/-. The order also explicitly stated that all monetary benefits would
be calculated and paid to him.
4. However, the Respondent failed to fix the Petitioner's wages on a
time-scale basis from 01.07.2007 to April 2009. Instead, he continued to be
paid only on a daily wage basis. Consequently, the Petitioner computed the
wages due to him for the period from July 2007 to April 2009 in accordance
with the terms of the settlement. After deducting the amount already paid,
he determined that the outstanding balance amounted to Rs. 1,00,699/-. The
Petitioner was also not paid his earned leave wages, which totaled
Rs. 14,820.96.
5. Consequently, the Petitioner filed a claim petition before the Labour
Court under Section 33C(2), seeking a sum of Rs. 1,15,520/- along with
interest at the rate of 24% per annum. The petition was numbered as
C.P. No. 101 of 2017, and notice was issued to the Respondent Corporation.
The Respondent Corporation entered an appearance and filed a counter
statement (dated Nil), opposing the claim.During the proceedings before the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
3 of 8
Labour Court, the Petitioner examined himself as PW1 and submitted five
documents, which were marked as Exhibits P1 to P5. On behalf of the
Respondent Corporation, six documents were produced and marked as
Exhibits R1 to R6.
6. The order of regularization dated 23.05.2009, which was submitted
by both parties, was marked as Ex.P2 on behalf of the Petitioner and Ex.R6
on behalf of the Respondent. This order stated that the Petitioner's services
were regularized with effect from 01.07.2007, and his time-scale pay was
fixed accordingly. It also prescribed a probation period for him. The
footnote of the order explicitly mentioned that the monetary benefits arising
from the regularization would be paid along with the salary for May 2009.
After examining these exhibits, the Labour Court concluded that the petition
for arrears was not barred by delay or laches and was maintainable.
However, it held that while the Petitioner's services were confirmed from
01.07.2007, he was entitled to monetary benefits only from 01.06.2009. The
Labour Court also rejected the documents submitted by the Respondent
regarding certain disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
4 of 8
7. Aggrieved by the rejection of his claim petition through the order
dated 02.04.2019, the workman has filed the present writ petition. The
learned counsel for the Petitioner, assailing the order of the Labour Court,
also relied on a judgment of the Division Bench, wherein relief was granted
to similarly placed individuals. In the case of K.P. Sakthivel & Ors. vs. The
Management of Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation &Anr., in Writ
Appeal Nos. 1581–1584 of 2021, dated 14.02.2023, the Division Bench
held as follows:
“A Division Bench of this Court, in W.A.No. 2155 of 2021,
dated 30.01.2023, while considering the issue with regard to
the benefit flowing to the employee under a settlement, has
categorically held that the Labour Court is empowered to
decide a pre-existing right without any adjudication. In this
case, the benefit accrues from the orders of the management,
wherein, it is admitted that the employees have been
regularized with retrospective effect. Hence, the employees
are entitled to the monetary benefit, as determined by the
Labour Court, and the finding of the learned single Judge,
on this issue, is interfered with.
Writ Appeals are, accordingly, allowed. The respondent
management is directed to disburse the amount to the
appellants – employees, as ordered by the Labour Court,
without interest, within a period of three months from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order, if not already paid. If
the management fails to pay the amount as aforesaid, it will
fetch interest at 6% per annum from the date of the
management regularizing the services and the amount of
interest shall be recovered from the Official (s), who is/are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
5 of 8
responsible to comply with the orders of the Court, and
adverse entry shall be made in the service record of the said
Officer(s) for dereliction of duty, that may be taken note of,
for depriving promotions to the said Officer (s). In the light
of the decision of the Supreme Court in Central Co-
operative Consumers’ Store Ltd Vs. Labour Court, H.P.at
Shimla and another, 1993 (3) SCC 214, the amount and
interest shall be paid first and recovery of interest cannot
wait for releasing the amount due to the employees.”
8. In light of the foregoing, the order passed by the Labour Court is
clearly erroneous. The workman is entitled to arrears of salary from the date
of his regularization, as well as wages for earned leave. Accordingly, the
impugned order in C.P. No. 101 of 2017 dated 02.04.2019 is set
aside.Consequently, the Respondent Corporation is directed to pay the
Petitioner a sum of Rs. 1,15,520/-. However, instead of the 24% interest
claimed, as per the Division Bench order, the unpaid amount shall carry an
interest of 6% per annum from the date it became due until the date of
payment.The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. No costs.
17.03.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ay
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
6 of 8
Copy to:
The Presiding Officer
Principal Labour Court,
Coimbatore
(with records if any)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
7 of 8
DR. A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
ay
Pre-delivery Judgment in
17.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 17/03/2025 08:16:07 pm )
8 of 8
