Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

The Chief Postmaster General And Others vs The Registrar And Others

Madras High Court|17 March, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

This Writ Petition is directed against the order, dated 10.06.2014, in O.A.No.1173 of 2012, on the file of Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, directing the petitioners to pay interest on account of belated payment of gratuity.
2. The learned Assistant Solicitor General submitted that, eventhough the second respondent was compulsorily retired on 15.05.2009, there was an F.I.R. registered against him, in the year, 2010 and that was the reason for withholding the gratuity. The learned Assistant Solicitor General further submitted that the petitioners are not liable to pay any interest on account of the subsequent events relating to the registration of the case by the Central Bureau of Investigation against the second respondent.
3. We have also heard the learned counsel for the second respondent.
4. The documents available on record indicates that the second respondent was made to retire compulsorily, by order, dated 15.05.2009. It was on the basis of a disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. It is also not in dispute that, immediately after passing the order of compulsory retirement, the second respondent was not given the gratuity amount due to him. The FIR was registered only in the year 2010. Even before registration of the FIR, the second respondent was entitled to receive the gratuity amount from the petitioners.
5. The disciplinary proceedings initiated against the second respondent culminated in passing an order on 15.05.2009, retiring him compulsorily. Therefore, it is clear that there was no proceedings pending against the second respondent prior to 15.05.2009, so as enable the petitioners to take shelter under Rule 68. This aspect was rightly considered by the Tribunal and the Original Application was allowed. We do not find any reason to take a different view in the matter. We confirm the order passed by the Tribunal.
6. In the upshot, we dismiss the Writ Petition. No costs.
Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
(K.K.S.J.,) & (M.V.M.J.,) 17.03.2017 To 1. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai.
K.K.Sasidharan,J.,
&
M.V.Muralidaran J.
sd W.P.No.1516 of 2016 17.03.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

The Chief Postmaster General And Others vs The Registrar And Others

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
17 March, 2017
Judges
  • K K Sasidharan
  • M V Muralidaran