Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

P.Ramaraj vs The Managing Director on 22 January, 2026

Author: B.Pugalendhi

Bench: B.Pugalendhi

                                                                                     WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026


                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                             DATED: 22.01.2026

                                                      CORAM:

                             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

                                          WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026

                     P.Ramaraj                                                              ... Petitioner

                                                            Vs
                     1.The Managing Director,
                       Tamil Nadu State Transport
                             Corporation (MDU) Ltd,
                       Bye pass road,
                       Madurai – 625 016.

                     2.The General Manager,
                       Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (MDU) Ltd,
                       Dindigul Regional Office,
                       District Collector Office Post,
                       Dindigul - 624 004.                             ...Respondents

                     PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
                     of India, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to
                     pay the interest at the rate of 6% per annum to the petitioner for the
                     belated payment of gratuity, provident fund, pension commutation,
                     EL surrender salary and leave salary from the date of retirement to
                     the date of actual payment within a time frame as may be fixed by
                     this court.

                     1/7




https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis            ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 01:15:30 pm )
                                                                                            WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026


                                       For Petitioner            : Mrs.D.Ramya
                                       For Respondents           : Mr.K.Ramaiah,
                                                                     Standing Counsel


                                                              ORDER

This writ petition is filed for a Mandamus, directing the respondent to pay interest to the petitioner at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment of terminal benefits from the date of his retirement till the actual payment, within the time stipulated by this Court.

2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner joined as a Conductor in the respondent Transport Corporation on 29.01.1999. After completion of 32 years of service, he retired from service on 31.05.2024. However, the retirement benefits, namely, Provident Fund, Gratuity and Leave Salary were settled only on 02.12.2025. Since the benefits have been settled belatedly, the respondent is liable to pay interest for the belated payment. Therefore, the petitioner gave a representation dated 08.12.2025 to the respondents, 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 01:15:30 pm ) WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026 however, the same did not evoke any response. Therefore, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for the above said relief.

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in similar writ petitions, this Court has ordered for payment of interest at the rate of 6% p.a. for the belated payment of retirement benefits and therefore, the petitioner is also entitled for the same relief.

4. It is reported on behalf of the respondents that the terminal benefits have been settled to the petitioner on 02.12.2025.

5. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.

6.This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival submissions made and also perused the materials placed on record. 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 01:15:30 pm ) WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026

7.The employer is liable to settle the retirement benefits to its employees without any delay and in case, if it is settled belatedly, it has to be compensated by way of interest for the belated payment. In this regard, the Hon'ble Apex Court in S.K.Dua vs. State of Haryana reported in 2008 (3) SCC 44, has held as follows:

“14. In the circumstances, prima facie, we are of the view that the grievance voiced by the appellant appears to be well founded that he would be entitled to interest on such benefits. If there are statutory rules occupying the field, the appellant could claim payment of interest relying on such rules. If there are administrative instructions, guidelines or norms prescribed for the purpose, the appellant may claim benefit of interest on that basis. But even in absence of statutory rules, administrative instructions or guidelines, an employee can claim interest under Part III of the Constitution relying on Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant, that retiral benefits are not in the nature of “bounty” is, in our opinion well founded and needs no authority in support thereof. In that view of the matter, in our considered opinion, the High Court was not right in dismissing the 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 01:15:30 pm ) WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026 petition in living even without issuing notice to the respondents.”

8.Following the same, in a similar issue, a Division Bench of this Court, in W.A.(MD)No.403 of 2010, etc. batch, vide common order dated 04.07.2014, has fixed the rate of interest at 6% per annum and held as under:-

“5. ..... even though there is no provision in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund for payment of interest, cannot stand in the light of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in S.K.Dua v. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2008) 3 SCC 44. As a matter of fact, the Rules do not contemplate belated payment of retirement benefits. The Rules contemplate prompt payment. When the Rules contemplate prompt payment and not bleated payment, the Rules will not contain a provision for payment of interest. The Pension Fund which was created as a Trust by the Corporation was supposed to act in trust for the employees' benefit. If the Trust could not make payments within the time stipulated, then, irrespective of whether there is any provision for payment of interest or not, the Corporation is obliged to make payment.” 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 01:15:30 pm ) WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026

9.Following the dictum laid down on this issue, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent/Transport Corporation to pay interest for the belated payment of retirement benefits at the rate of 6% per annum from 01.06.2024 till the date of actual disbursement, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

22.01.2026 NCC: Yes/No Index:Yes/No DSK To

1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (MDU) Ltd, Bye pass road, Madurai – 625 016.

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (MDU) Ltd, Dindigul Regional Office, District Collector Office Post, Dindigul - 624 004.

6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 01:15:30 pm ) WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026 B.PUGALENDHI, J.

DSK WP(MD)No.1512 of 2026 22.01.2026 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 26/02/2026 01:15:30 pm )