← Library
Madras High CourtWP/39810/2025dismissed

M.Subramanya Chetty (Pf No.185975) v. The Managing Director And Chief Executive Officer

2025-10-25Honourable Mr Justice G.K. Ilanthiraiyan4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.10.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN M.Subramanya Chetty .....

Petitioner Vs 1.The Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer, Union Bank of India, Central Office No. 239 Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai.

2.The Zonal Manager, Zonal Office, Union Bank of India, 3rd Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 139 Prakasam Salai, Broadway, George Town, Chennai 600104.

.....

Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant the arrears of salary based on the fitment w.e.f. 02.05.1988 by disposing the petitioner's representation dated 23.07.2014 within the time limit fixed by this Honble Court. For Petitioner : Mr.R.R.Mohana Raja

ORDER

1/4

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to grant the arrears of salary based on the fitment with effect from 02.05.1988.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioner was appointed as a Sub Staff and thereafter, posted as Driver-cum-Peon with a special allowance on 26.07.1978. Subsequently, his service was regularized by the respondents bank. There was fitment for all the employees, including the petitioner, by the respondents bank. Accordingly, a settlement was entered into on 01.03.1996, in which a separate fitment formula was prescribed for Drivers. After his retirement from the service in the year 2020, the petitioner submitted a representation seeking arrears of salary based on the fitment with effect from 02.05.1988. It is seen that the petitioner did not pursue the issue during his tenure of service and has now raised the claim after a lapse of nearly five years from the date of his retirement.

4. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that, on 2/4

the ground of latches alone, the representation submitted by the petitioner cannot be granted. Hence, the writ petition lacks merits and is liable to be dismissed.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

25.10.2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking Lpp To 1.The Managing Director & Chief Executive Officer, Union Bank of India, Central Office No. 239 Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point Mumbai.

2.The Zonal Manager, Zonal Office, Union Bank of India, 3rd Floor, Union Bank Bhavan, 139 Prakasam Salai, Broadway, George Town, Chennai 600104.

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

3/4

Lpp 25.10.2025 4/4