M.Dhanarajapandian, v. The Tamilnadu State Transport

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.08.2016

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD).No.14633 of 2016 **** M.Dhanarajapandian ...

Petitioner Vs 1.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd, rep.by its Managing Director, Madurai-625 016. 2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd, Madurai Region, Madurai-625 016.

3.The Administrator, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Employees Pension Fund Trust, Thiruvallur Illam, Pallavan Salai, Chennai-600 002.

...

Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant 5th Review Benefits and to Revise the Petitioner pay in the post of Senior Checking Inspector with retrospective effect from 01.09.2010 in term of Government order in G.O.Ms.No.61 Transport (C) Department dated 30.04.2015 and as per the 12(3) settlement dated 22.01.2011 and further directing the Respondents to pay the difference in salary and to pay difference in Retirement Benefits including difference amount in monthly pension Gratuity, Commuted value of pension, leave salary and all other attendant benefits payable to the petitioner from 01.09.2010 to 30.06.2011 together with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

For petitioner : M/s.A.Rahul For Respondents : Mr.A.Jeyaram ********

ORDER

The petitioner was an employee of the respondents Transport Corporation. Seeking his benefits, he has filed the present Writ Petition.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have not given the benefits both under the Settlement and as per the Government Order. In this regard, the petitioner has given a representation to the respondents. Since the said representation did not evoke any response, the petitioner is before this Court.

3. At this juncture, learned Standing Counsel for the Transport Corporation, after taking notice for the respondents, submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court, in W.P.(MD). No.4829 of 2016, dated 10.03.2016, has directed the respondents therein to consider the representations of the petitioners therein. Therefore, he submitted that similar directions may be issued to this petitioner also.

4.

In view of the above, the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, on merits and in accordance with law, and pass appropriate orders, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is also directed to enclose a copy of this order along with the representation already sent to the respondents, for further follow up, in this regard.

5.

With the above direction, all the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (W) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar ssm +1CC to Mr.A.K.Thangavelu, Advocate Sr.No.43707 GJM/Sk/SKN/30.8.16-2p-2c W.P(MD).No.14633 of 2016 11.08.2016 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/