IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05-01-2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

and

WMP No. 52582 OF 2025

N.Raju

Petitioner

Vs

Tamil Nadu State Transport

Corporation

Represented by its Managing Director,

12, Ramakrishnan Salai, Salem-626 637

Respondent(s)

PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the respondent in its proceedings TNSTC (S) ACt / CO 1 / 23572 / 2014 dated 26.05.2025 and to quash the same a illegal and without jurisdiction and further

direct the respondent to pay retirement benefits to the petitioner.

For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.Vishnu

For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Raja

Standing Counsel

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed, challenging the impugned order of the

respondent dated 26.05.2025 and seeking a direction to the respondent to

release the retirement benefits due to the petitioner.

2.The case of the petitioner is that he was employed as a Driver in the respondent Corporation at Salem District from 05.03.1997 till superannuation on 31.10.2013. On the date of his retirement, the petitioner was a senior driver. At the time of his initial appointment, the petitioner was engaged on a daily basis and was paid Rs.20/- per day. Subsequently, his pay was revised and fixed at Rs.575/- per month as basic salary, and annual increments were granted based on his performance. While in service, the petitioner actively involved in union activities, and on account of such involvement, the respondent levelled a charge against him alleging unauthorised absence, made baseless accusations, and collected fines from him under that pretext. Lastly, the petitioner received a bonus on 01.11.2001, and the next increment due on 01.11.2002 was not effected. On 30.11.2013, the petitioner received a letter from the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation bearing KU.EN.E.No.8/2384, stating that he was liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,96,800/- towards an alleged offence said to have been committed during his service. The said letter further stated that unless the petitioner remitted the alleged amount, his retirement benefits would not be processed. The petitioner is unaware of the authority under which such a demand was made and his retirement benefits were withheld. After permitting the petitioner to retire on 31.10.2013, the respondent has illegally foisted a demand of Rs.1,96,800/-, claiming it to be a penalty recoverable from his salary, which is wholly arbitrary and without justification. The petitioner, due to his advanced age, is unable to maintain his family without the payment of his retirement and pensionary benefits. The entire procedure followed by the respondent is illegal and no notice was ever served on the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner filed W.P No.23572 of 2014, which was disposed of on 06.02.2025, directing the respondent to give a personal hearing to the petitioner as to why the aforesaid amount recovered from the benefit of the petitioner should not be withheld.

3.Pursuant to the order of this Court, the respondent passed an order vide proceedings dated 26.05.2025 without considering any facts or the representation given by the petitioner. On 22.05.2025, the respondent had called for a personal hearing, during which the petitioner elaborately explained the facts pertaining to the charges famed against him, including the allegation of unauthorised absence and baseless accusations. Curiously, the order dated 26.05.2025 was passed even without granting the petitioner sufficient time to place his objections on record. A perusal of the impugned order would clearly indicate that the hearing conducted on 22.05.2025 was a mere eyewash. Evidently, the order dated 26.05.2025 was pre-decided and even the submissions made by the petitioner were not considered. The petitioner subsequently brought these facts to the notice of the respondent by way of a representation dated 15.07.2025, requesting a fair opportunity. The hea