SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 10116

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
Sundaresan B – Appellant
Versus
The Tamil University – Respondent



BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date of Reserving the Order Date of Pronouncing the Order

20.11.2025 23.01.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU W.P.(MD) No.32596 of 2025 Dr.B.Sundaresan … Petitioner -vs-

1.The Tamil University, Through its Registrar, Thanjavur, Thanjavur District.

2.The Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit, Tamil University, Thanjavur. … Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or directions in the nature of a Writ directing the respondent to disburse and pay to the petitioner the arrears of salary, monetary benefits and other consequential benefits arising out of the promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian (Selection Grade) with effect from 27.07.1998, as ordered in the proceedings dated 30.11.2018 and 18.02.2021, together with interest of 18% and to consequently revise and disburse the petitioner's pensionary benefits and other retirement benefits in accordance with the said promotion and pay fixation orders and pass such further or other suitable order.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan For Respondents : Mr.Gokul Abimanyu for R1 : Mr.M.Siddharthan for R2 Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The instant Writ Petition had been filed seeking for a Mandamus to direct the respondent to disburse and pay the petitioner the arrears of salary/ monetary benefits and other consequential benefits arising out of the promotion to the petitioner to the post of Assistant Librarian (Selection Grade) with effect from 27.07.1998 as ordered by the proceedings dated 30.11.2018 and 18.02.2021 together with interest at the rate of 18%.

2. Heard Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Gokul Abimanyu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first respondent and Mr.M.Siddharthan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the second respondents.

3. By order dated 30.11.2018, the first respondent based upon the Report of the Selection Committee and the Syndicate has ordered the petitioner to be conferred with the Selection Grade in the post of Assistant Librarian with effect from 27.07.1998 together with the monetary benefits in that regard. It had also further ordered that the pensionary benefits would be fixed pursuant to the Government orders in that regard. Thereafter, by proceedings dated 06.05.2019, his pensionary benefits was also refixed.

4. By further order dated 18.02.2021, the salary of the petitioner was refixed with effect from 27.07.1998 by refixing his pay received with effect from 27.07.1998 in the cadre off Assistant Librarian (Selection Grade). However, disbursement of the same was directed to be made as and when the financial condition of the first respondent becomes better. In spite of repeated representations from the petitioner on various dates, the petitioner who is aged about 73 years had not been benefitted with the monetary benefits as ordered by the first respondent in proceedings dated 30.11.2018 and 18.02.2021.

5. Having found that the petitioner is entitled for being conferred with the Selection Grade in the cadre of Assistant Librarian that too after his superannuation, it is the duty of the respondents to also disburse the monetary benefits arising out of such post. A perusal of the orders passed by the first respondent indicated above do not also disentitle the petitioner for monetary benefits. The said orders specifically grants monetary benefits to the petitioner, but the respondents granted such benefits only notionally, therefore, the petitioner cannot be denied the monetary benefits. Even though, the order specifically grants monetary benefits to the petitioner, the respondents had benefitted the same only notionally without any authority.

6. For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition stands allowed and there shall be a direction to the first respondent to disburse the monetary benefits and pay the arrears as

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top