V.Subramaniyan, v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.04.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR V.Subramaniyan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

2.The Controlling Authority/ The Assistant Commissioner of Labour, (The Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972) The Office of Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Dindigul.

3.The Management of R.1622, Pugalur Water Pumping Irrigation Cooperative Society Ltd., Pugalur Sugar Mills Post, Karur District.

... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to recover the gratuity amount of Rs.1,86,666/- together with 10% interest from 31.05.2017

as ordered by the 2nd respondent in his order dated 26.07.2018 in P.G.No. 52/2017 from the 3rd respondent within a period of time as may be fixed by this Court and to pay the same to the petitioner. For Petitioner :

No appearance For R1 & R2 :

Mr.F.Deepak Special Government Pleader For R3 :

Mr.M.P.Senthil

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus to direct the first respondent to recover the gratuity amount of Rs.1,86,666/- together with 10% interest from 31.05.2017 as ordered by the second respondent in his order dated 26.07.2018 in P.G.No.52/2017 from the third respondent and to pay the same to the petitioner.

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration on 28.03.2025, there was no representation for the petitioner. Hence, the matter was directed to be listed under the caption 'for dismissal'. Accordingly, the same is listed

today (02.04.2025) under the caption 'for dismissal'. In spite of the same, there is no representation for the petitioner either in the pre-lunch session or in the post-lunch session. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Special Government Pleader that the amount that was claimed by the petitioner in the present writ petition has already been paid to the petitioner as early as in the month of December, 2022 itself. The learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3 also submitted that the entire amount due and payable to the petitioner towards gratuity together with interest has already been paid. In the light of the above, this Court is convinced that the relief sought in the writ petition has become infructuous.

3. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. There shall be no order as to costs.

02.04.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes ABR

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

ABR To 1.The District Collector, Karur District, Karur.

2.The Controlling Authority/ The Assistant Commissioner of Labour, The Office of Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Dindigul.

02.04.2025 (2/2)