Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 83581
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
M. Dhandapani, N. Dilip Kumar, JJ
State of Tamil Nadu – Appellant
Versus
D. Stephen Jeyson – Respondent
W.A(MD)No.1593 of 2021|CMP (MD) No.6776 of 2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M. Mahaboob Athiff, SGP
For the Respondents: S. Rajasekar, P. Gunasekaran
The court affirmed that an employee is entitled to statutory interest in the event of delayed payment of gratuity benefits following retirement.
Headnote:(A) Gratuity Benefits - Delayed Payment - Statutory Interest - When there is a delay in the payment of gratuity benefits after retirement, the employee is entitled to statutory interest. (Para 4)
Issues: Whether the award of 6% interest on the delayed payment of gratuity was appropriate.
Prayer:This Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No. 6105 of 2021 dated 18.03.2021.
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by M.DHANDAPANI.J.)
This Writ Appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.6105 of 2021, dated 18.03.2021.
2. The respondent was employed as a P.G. Assistant and retired from service on 30.04.2018. However, his gratuity benefits were not settled. Thereafter, he made a representation on 23.11.2020 seeking grant of interest for the belated payment of gratuity for the period from 30.04.2018 to 14.10.2019. Thereafter, the respondent filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.(MD) No.6105 of 2021. This Court, by its order dated 18.03.2021, issued a direction to the respondent to pay interest at 6%. Challenging the same, the present Writ Appeal has been filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the available materials on record.
4. Even on a bare perusal of the affidavit filed by the respondent, there was a delay on the part of the respondent in making payment towards the gratuity and for which, the respondent is entitled to statutory interest. However, this Court awarded only 6% interest. Such order passed by this Court cannot be interfered with.
5. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
