IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
J. SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
K. Radhakrishnan - Appellant
Versus
Metropolitan Transport Corporation Ltd. - Respondent
W.P. No. 13052 of 2020
Decided On : 12-02-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. recovery is illegal (Para 3) |
| 2. refund and settle benefits (Para 8 , 9) |
ORDER :
1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of Declaration, declaring that the action of the respondents in recovering a sum of Rs.25,200/- from the petitioner towards the monetary value of the unimplemented punishment as illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently direct the respondents to refund him a sum of Rs.25,200/- and to settle all his terminal benefits such as Gratuity, PF, the amounts payable under Social Security Scheme and Family Benefit Fund Scheme, Earned Leave Salary, IRT contributions and commuted value of pension, together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum, within a specified time.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined as conductor in the first respondent Corporation on 21.04.1988 and subsequently he was designated as Special Grade Conductor. While the petitioner was working in such post, a charge memo was issued against the petitioner on 30.04.2019 stating that the petitioner has already sold ticket to the value of Rs.11/- to one passenger and framed two charges pertaining to the year 2019. The petitioner has given his explanation dated 21.05.2019 and requested to exonerate him from the charges. However, the second respondent issued a final order dated 31.08.2019 and imposed the punishment against the petitioner to reduce in pay by 3 stages with cumulative effect for the period of one year. Challenging the same, the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the first respondent to set aside the order dated 31.08.2019. The first respondent has passed an order dated 13.11.2019 and modified the punishment into stoppage of increment for 6 months with cumulative effect. After completion of more than 31 years of service, the petitioner retired on 31.01.2020 on attaining the age of superannuation. Since, the modified punishment could not be implemented, the respondents 1 and 2 forced the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.25,200/- towards the monetary value of the unimplemented punishment of stoppage of increment for six months with cumulative effect. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a representation dated 11.08.2020 to the respondents and requested to refund the amount of Rs.25,200/- which was recovered from him and also to settle all his terminal benefits. But the respondents have not settled the same. Therefore, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the writ petition has been filed challenging the recovery for a sum of Rs.25,200/- from the petitioner towards monetary value of unimplemented punishment is illegal and without jurisdiction.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the issue has already been dealt with the following Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court :-
(i) The State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Limited Rep. by its Managing Director and Others vs. G. Senthil and another, dated in W.A. (MD) No. 1270 of 2020 dated 15.06.2021
(ii) The Managing Director, The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd. and another vs. K. Perumal in W.A. (MD) No. 417 of 2024 dated 18.03.2024
5. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the Judgment of the writ appeals cited by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is squarely applicable to the facts of the present case.
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and also perused the materials available on record.
7. It is seen that the issue is squarely covered by following decisions of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court:-
(i) In The State Express Transport Corporation (Tamil Nadu) Limited Rep. by its Managing Director and Others vs. G. Senthil and another, dated 15.06.2021, it has been held as under :-
7. The above condition states that the increment postponement orders which could not be implemented p
The management cannot recover the monetary value of unimplemented punishments post-retirement as there is no provision in the Certified Standing Orders allowing such actions.
The Transport Corporation lacked jurisdiction to recover amounts linked to unimplemented punishments as per prior judgments.
The recovery of amounts towards unimplemented punishments is illegal and arbitrary.
Transport Corporation cannot recover amounts for unimplemented punishment of increment postponement; delay condoned for retired workman.
Settlement under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act cannot nullify judicial decisions interpreting statutory rules; unauthorized recovery of increments invalid.
Recoveries from terminal benefits post-retirement are impermissible without explicit legal authority, as per established judicial precedents.
Point of law: doctrine of equality is a dynamic and evolving concept having many dimensions. The embodiment of the doctrine of equality can be found in Articles 14 to 18 contained in Part III of the ....
Disciplinary actions must adhere to principles of natural justice and prescribed regulations; imposing unauthorized punishments is unlawful.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.