M.Chandran v. The Regional Manager,

THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.04.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.P.(MD)Nos.10919 and 10920 of 2015 M.Chandran ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.10919 of 2015 M.Chellaiah ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.10920 of 2015 Vs 1.The Regional Manager, The Tamilnadu Transport Corporation (Madurai) Region, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

2.The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation, Cumbum, Theni District.

3.The Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Cumbum Branch, Theni District.

4.The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Cumbum Branch, Theni District.

... Respondents in both Writ Petitions PRAYER in W.P.(MD)No.10919 of 2015: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to remit the petitioner's monthly salary in account No.34774458344 in the fourth respondent bank instead of remitting the same in account No.0100510153486 of the third respondent within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.

PRAYER in W.P.(MD)No.10920 of 2015: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to remit the petitioner's monthly salary in account No.31760885941 in the fourth respondent bank instead of remitting the same in account No.01005601019056 of the third respondent within the period that may be stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar for Ajmal Associates https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For R1 and R2 : Mr.A.Jeyaram

For R3 : No appearance For R4 : Mr.G.Radhakrishnan (in both writ petitions) COMMON ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners and the learned counsel for the fourth respondent. 2.The writ petitioners are employed in the first respondent corporation. The third respondent is maintaining the writ petitioners' salary account. It appears that the petitioners availed loan from the third respondent bank. The petitioners have not repaid the said loan amount. Therefore, the third respondent began to debit from the writ petitioners' salary accounts. Therefore, the petitioners want the employer to remit their monthly salary in the accounts maintained with the fourth respondent.

3.The dispute is essentially between the writ petitioners and the third respondent. Therefore, it is not open to the petitioners herein to seek transfer of their salary account from the third respondent to the fourth respondent bank. These are the matters that are essentially decided by the employer. It is not for this Court to issue any direction in this regard. 4.Accordingly, this writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) +2 CC to M/s.G.RADHA KRISHNAN, Advocate ( SR-60236[F] dated 10/04/2019 ) +2 CC to M/s.AJMAL ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-60349[F] dated 11/04/2019 ) PNN W.P.(MD)Nos.10919 and 10920 of 2015 10.04.2019 KM/(27.04.2019) 2P 5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/