J.Mahesh, S/O.Jaidev, v. The Superintending Engineer,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

( Special Original Jurisdiction ) Monday, the Sixteenth day of April Two Thousand Eighteen PRESENT THE HON`BLE MR JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH WMP.Nos.4869 & 4870 of 2018 in WP.No.19181 & 19182 of 2014 J.MAHESH, [PETITIONER IN WMP. 4869/18] R.KUPPUSAMY [1 & 2 PETITIONERS IN WMP.4870/18] 2 G.GNANAJOTHI Vs 1 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, [1 & 2 RESPONDENTS IN BOTH THE TANGEDCO, TIRUVANNAMALAI.

PETITIONS] 2 THE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, VELLORE.

3 R.ELUMALAI, [3rd RESPONDENT IN WMP.4869/18] A.GANDHI [3 TO 11 RESPONDENTS IN WMP.4870/18] P.BASKARAN G.SUGANDHARAJ P.VENKATESAN R.PRABHAKARAN P.G.VASUDEVAN G.SUBRAMANIAN E.RAMESH P.NALLATHAMBI Petitions praying that in these circumstances stated therein and in the respective affidavits filed therewith the High Court will be pleased to

(i)Clarify that we are entitled to the interest accrued in the amount ordered to be withdrawn by this Honble Court in MP.No.1/2014 in WP.No.19181/2014(in WMP.No.4869/2018)and (ii)Clarify that we are entitled to the interest accrued in the amount ordered to be withdrawn by this Honble Court in MP No.1/2014 in WP No.19182/2014(in WMP.No.4870/2018) respectively. Order: These petitions coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and the respective affidavits filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of M/S.N.SURESH, Advocate for the petitioner in both the petitions and of M/S.VARALAKSHMI, Advocate for the 1st respondent in both the petitions the court made the following order:- These petitions have been filed seeking to clarify that the petitioner is entitled to the interest accrued on the amount ordered to be withdrawn by this Court by order dated 18.04.2017 passed in M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2014 in W.P.Nos.19181 and 19182 of 2014.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the order has been complied with, the interest component as agreed has not been paid.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent does not dispute the factum of interest accrued.

4. It is needless to state that when the principal amount is directed to be withdrawn, it includes the interest component as well. In such view of the matter, these petitions stand allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to interest accrued.

-sd/- 16/04/2018 / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar ( Statistics / C.S. ) High Court, Madras - 600 104.

TO 1 THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, TANGEDCO, TIRUVANNAMALAI.

2 THE PRESIDING OFFICER, LABOUR COURT, VELLORE.

C.C. to M/S.N.SURESH Advocate Sr.No.4714 C.C. to M/S.VARALAKSHMI, Advocate on payment of necessary charges Order in WMP.Nos.4869 & 4870 of 2018 in WP.No.19181 & 19182 of 2014 Date :16/04/2018 From 26.2.2001 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Interim Orders in this format KP(18/04/2018)