← Library
Madras High CourtWP/340/2026dismissed

P.S.Nandakumar v. Union Bank Of India Limited

2026-01-19Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 19.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.340 of 2026 P.S.Nandakumar ... Petitioner Vs.

1. United Bank of India Limited (CIN.U99999MH1919PTC000615) Rep. By its Authorised Signatory Having Central Office at Union Bank Bhavan, 239 Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400 021.

2. The Chief Manager, Employee Benefits Division, Human Resource Department, Union Bank of India, Union Bank Bhavan, 239 Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Nariman Point, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400 021. ....Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the

records pertaining to the communication dated 29.11.2025 bearing No.HR EBD;20110;2025 on the file fo the second respondent and quash the same as illegal, unlawful, null, and void, and consequently, direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the maximum eligible gratuity amount of the petitioner from 28.02.2023 till 24.09.2025. For Petitioners :

Mr.Anish Gopi

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the communication dated 29.11.2025 bearing No.HR EBD;20110;2025 on the file of the second respondent and consequently, direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 10% per annum on the maximum eligible gratuity amount of the petitioner from 28.02.2023 till 24.09.2025.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is the employee of the respondent bank and he was retired from service. After retirement, his terminal benefits was not settled and gratuity amount also settled with delay. However, interest for belated payment has not been settled to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation on 31.10.2025 to the

Managing Director, Union Bank of India and the same was rejected vide impugned order dated 29.11.2025. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the second respondent has erroneously concluded that since the gratuity was paid within the prescribed time-limit . The delay in payment from 28.02.2023 to 24.09.2025 spans over two and a half years, for which, statutory interest is mandatory payable under the Act.

4. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials available on record.

5. On perusal of the records, it reveals that the petitioner made a representation 31.10.2025 seeking interest on the belated payment for terminal benefits. However, the same was rejected vide order dated 29.11.2025 on the ground that gratuity has been settled in time-line and therefore, there is no need to pay for interest. Since the issue arises in the

present writ petition is disputed question of fact, the same cannot be decided by this Court under 226 of Constitution of India. The petitioner has to approach only before the authority under Payment of Gratuity Act.

6. In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. However, liberty is grated to the petitioner to work out his remedy in the manner known to law.

19.01.2026 rli NCC: Yes / No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No To

1. The District Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Namakkal District.

2. The Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) Pallipalayam, Namakkal District.

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

rli W.P.No.340 of 2026 19.01.2026