IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 05.10.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN W.P.No.13176 of 2002 and W.P.M.P.Nos.17727 of 2002 14638 of 2003 E. Paramasivam .. Petitioner Vs. The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust, Chennai 600 001. .. Respondent Prayer : This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to forthwith settle, release and disburse the entire terminal and pensionary benefits of the petitioner herein without causing any further delay. For Petitioner : G.Thangavel For Respondent : ORDER
The petitioner an Ex.Serviceman, was re-employed in Chennai Port Trust, respondent herein, on 25.11.1986 as an Assistant Technician (Electrician Grade III) and after completion of fourteen years and two months of service, he attained superannuation on 31.01.2001.
2. The petitioner states that he gave a representation to the respondent on 27.02.2001 for settlement of terminal benefits. Thereafter, the petitioner issued a legal notice on 31.08.2001 calling upon the respondent to settle retirement benefits. A reply dated 28.09.2001 was issued calling upon the petitioner to comply with certain requirements. On 10.11.2001 the petitioner wrote a letter to the respondent stating that he complied with the requirements. However the terminal benefits were not given and therefore he again sent a notice through his Advocate on 22.12.2001, addressed to the Respondent’s Advocate and a copy of the said notice was marked to the respondent. Even though the notice was served, neither reply was received nor the amount was paid. Therefore, the petitioner has come before this Court seeking Writ of Mandamus.
3. The writ petition is of the Year 2002, notice was served on the respondent. Even though the respondent’s name appeared in the cause-list, nobody appeared on behalf of the respondent.
4. It is very unfortunate that an Ex-Service Man was treated very shabbily by the respondent and he has been struggling to get the terminal benefits even after 9 years of his retirement. Moreover the petitioner served more than 14 years in the respondent / Port Trust and attained superannuation as early as on 31.01.2001.
5. The petitioner gave the representation on 27.02.2001 and legal notice dated 31.08.2001. The reply dated 28.09.2001 given by the respondent reads as follows:
” Sub : Your notice dated 31.08.2001 on behalf of
Shri E.Paramasivam Retd., Employee of the
Trust Regarding:-
——–
Shri Paramasivam, Token No.5900., Tech(Elec) Gr.III., retired with effect from 31.01.2001.
In order to settle the retirement benefits by letters dated 10.01.2001 and 22.01.2001 he was required to produce the following:-
1.Three copies of Passport size of Photographs with his wife and;
2.Two witnesses permanent employees of the Trust to sign as witnesses in the settlement papers.
In spite of the same he has not complied with the same so far.
Please advise your client to urgently report to the C.M.E, and comply with the above requirements.
LEGAL ADVISER”
6. Pursuant to the above said letter, the petitioner sent a letter dated 10.11.2001 stating that he complied with the requirements as sought for in the reply dated 28.09.2001 The relevant portion of the reply is extracted as follows:-
” I like to inform and state on 30.05.2001 itself I have send 3 copies of pass port Size Photograph of self & wife to the Chairman Chennai Port Trust, by Registered Post for the Settlement of Accounts in Trust.
Further, I have opted for Military family pension Rs.1949/- p.m (Normal Rate) under modified parity w.e.f. 01.01.1996 in respect of pre 01.01.1996 PBOR family pensioners. Which will be paid to my wife/nominee after my death.
Further, I have obtained signature from two witnesses of Permanent employees in Trust in the settlement papers on 02.11.2001 and submitted the same in chief mechanical Engineering Department.
I invite your kind attention to expediate the subject matter and settle my bonafide claims without Prejudice to the rights and benefits or re-employed, ex-serviceman pensioners at the earliest without any more delay.”
7. Thereafter no reply was received from the respondent and therefore again the petitioner sent a notice on 22.12.2001 to the counsel for the respondent, with a copy marked to the Chennai Port Trust calling upon them to settle the terminal benefits. Even after that, neither the benefits were settled nor any reply was given. If there is any dispute with regard to the entitlement of the petitioner or the quantum of pension, the respondent is at liberty to proceed as per law and the respondent could have sent a reply giving the details. In this case, as stated above the respondent neither settled the amount nor replied. The petitioner attained superannuation as early as 2001 and almost 9 years have gone. The petitioner is an Ex-Serviceman who served for our nation and he should have been treated with dignity by the respondent. The action of the respondent is not settling the terminal benefits is required to be condemned.
8. The very fact that the respondent has not chosen to file any counter would show that it has got no defence and this Court, deems that it is an admission on the part of the Respondent. In view of that the respondent is directed to settle, the pensionary benefits and other benefits of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. For the above said amount the petitioner is entitled to 8% interest from the date of his entitlement. The petitioner is also entitled to exemplary cost of Rs.10,000/-. The said cost should be paid by the respondent to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the same is to be reported to this Court. For compliance call on 16.11.2010.
9. This writ petition is allowed. Consequently connected the Miscellaneous Petitions are also closed. No costs.
05.10.2010
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
adl
Note : The Registry is directed to send a copy
of the order to the Respondent.
adl
To
The Chairman,
Chennai Port Trust,
Chennai 600 001