Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 49625

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. Asha, J
V. Thangarajan – Appellant
Versus
Managing Director – Respondent
WP No. 19590 of 2026

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: C. Venkatesan
For the Respondents: A. Vinoth Raja, K. Sathish

The court may issue a writ of mandamus to direct a public authority to consider and dispose of a pending representation regarding service benefits in accordance with the law within a stipulated time frame.

Headnote:The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to direct the respondent corporation to dispose of representations regarding the payment of a gratuity balance of Rs. 28,313/- plus interest. The petitioner was formerly employed as a driver with the respondent corporation. The court addressed the issue of whether the respondent is obligated to consider pending representations regarding terminal benefits. The court held that, given the limited relief sought, it was appropriate to issue a mandamus directing the respondent to resolve the petitioner's grievance on its merits in accordance with law. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to pass orders on the petitioner’s representation within four weeks.

Table of Content
1. summary of facts regarding non-payment of gratuity. (Para 1 , 2)
2. judicial direction to dispose of pending representation within specific timeframe. (Para 3 , 4)

Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 30.06.2025 and 18.12.2025 pertaining to gratuity balance Rs. 28,313/- with interest to petitioner.

Order

This writ petition is filed for the following relief:

“To direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 30.06.2025 and 18.12.2025 pertaining to gratuity balance Rs. 28,313/- with interest to petitioner.”

2. The petitioner worked as a Driver in the 1st respondent corporation from 15.01.1983 to 15.03.1995. The petitioner’s case is that his gratuity amount has not been fully settled to him. Therefore, he made a representation to respondents in this regard. Since there is no response the petitioner is before this Court.

3. Considering the limited relief sought in this writ petition, a mandamus is issued. The 1st respondent is directed to consider the petitoiner’s representation dated 18.12.2025 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 49625

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASP.T. Asha, JV. Thangarajan – AppellantVersusManaging Director – RespondentWP No. 19590 of 2026

The court may issue a writ of mandamus to direct a public authority to consider and dispose of a pending representation regarding service benefits in accordance with the law within a stipulated time frame.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. Asha, J
V. Thangarajan – Appellant
Versus
Managing Director – Respondent
WP No. 19590 of 2026