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

Lakshmi vs The Commissioner

Madras High Court|14 September, 2017
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Since the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions is one and the same, they were heard together and they are disposed of by this Common Order.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they are all Sanitary Workers in the respondent Municipality. After completion of 30 years of their service, all of them retired voluntarily in the year 2003. After retirement, as per the Local Fund Audit, pension was sanctioned for the petitioners calculating their total years of service and the petitioners were receiving the pension from April, 2004 onwards. While so, in the month of June, 2004, the respondent suspended the payment of pension on the ground that the petitioners approached the Labour Court for payment of Gratuity. Hence, the present Writ Petitions have been filed.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent and I have also carefully gone through the materials available on record.
4. On the face of the records, it is obvious that the impugned order itself is per se illegal. The petitioners have right to approach the authority concerned under the payment of Gratuity Act. For that ground, the respondent has no power to suspend their pension. In view of the above, the impugned order of the respondent dated 10.6.2004 is set aside and the Writ Petitions stand allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
14.09.2017 tsi To The Commissioner, Udumalpet Municipality, Udumalpet, Coimbatore.
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
tsi W.P.Nos.23554, 23555 and 23564/2004 14.09.2017
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

Lakshmi vs The Commissioner

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
14 September, 2017
Judges
  • M Dhandapani