N.Appasamy, v. P.W.C.Devithar,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.04.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA Contempt Petition No.1883 of 2018 N.Appasamy, No.220/250, Kabali Vana Bojana Thottam, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai 28.
..
Petitioner -vs1. Dr.P.W.C.Davidar The Principal Secretary Transport Department Secretariat, Government of Tamil Nadu Chennai 600 009
2. Anbu Abraham The Managing Director Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Ltd., Pallavan Illam Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002
3. C.Rajasundar The General Manager Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd., Madurai Region, Bye Pass Road Madurai 625 010
4. Mr.Durairaj The General Manager Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd., Tirunelveli Region Vannarapattai, Tirunelveli
5. V.Venkatarajan The Administrator Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Pallavan Salai, Chennai 600 002 ..
Respondents
Petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to punish the respondents for wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 17.04.2017 made in W.P.No.9111 of 2017.
For Petitioner :: Mr.S.T.Varadarajulu For Respondents :: Mr.K.Ravikumar Additional Government Pleader for R1 Mr.A.Antony Arockia Raja Standing Counsel for R2 to 5
ORDER
Mr.C.Durairaj, the General Manager of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Limited, Tirunelveli is present and also reported compliance of the order. The learned standing counsel for the respondents 2 to 5 also, filing a calculation memo through Mr.Durairaj, the General Manager of the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Limited, Tirunelveli, has stated that the Administrator, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Employees Pension Fund Trust, Chennai, the fifth respondent herein, in compliance of the order passed by this Court, had paid the entire amount to which the petitioner is entitled to along with interest.
2. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is entitled to get pension.
3. But in Serial No.7 of the calculation memo, it is stated that since the petitioner has not contributed to the pension scheme, the petitioner is not eligible for pension and in lieu of pension, service gratuity of Rs.64,273/- was paid on 8.2.2019. Therefore, it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law. Hence, recording the calculation memo filed by the fourth respondent stating that the fifth respondent has fully complied with the order passed by this Court, this contempt petition stands closed and the contemnor is discharged. SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) ss //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2019. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
Sd/20/05/2019