Non-Consideration Of Representation To Statutory Authority Amounts To Dereliction Of Duty: Madras High Court
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R.N.Manjula while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of C. Chandran. vs Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd & Ors. has held that non-consideration of a representation made to a statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty. Background Facts C. Chandran (Petitioner) was appointed...
A single judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice R.N.Manjula while deciding a Writ Petition in the case of C. Chandran. vs Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd & Ors. has held that non-consideration of a representation made to a statutory authority amounts to dereliction of duty.
Background Facts
C. Chandran (Petitioner) was appointed as Tradesman in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd & Ors (Respondent) in 1989 and he retired from service on 30.06.2022 as Special Grade Tradesman. However, a tripartite wage settlement u/s 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was entered into between the Management of the Respondent and the Trade Unions on 24.08.2022. under the wage settlement agreement, the Management of the Respondent agreed revise the wages of the employees those who were in service as on 01.09.2019 by revising the pay by 5% of the earlier wages. Thus, Petitioner was covered under the terms of settlement as he retired in 2022 and consequently, his wages should also have been revised based on the Wage Settlement Agreement w.e.f 01.09.2019.
However, the Respondent paid the gratuity, pension and leave salary to the Petitioner based on his pre-revised wages. It was thus contended by the Petitioner that Respondents were liable to pay him the difference of pension, difference in wages, difference in gratuity and difference in leave salary from 01.09.2019 to 30.06.2022.
The Petitioner submitted a representation before the Respondent to pay the difference in retirement benefits from 2019 to 2022. However, there was no response to the Representation of the Petitioner. Thus, the Petitioner filed the writ petition
Findings of the Court
The court observed that whenever a representation is made to a statutory authority, a duty is cast upon them to consider the same on merits and pass and appropriate order instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. The court further held that non-consideration of a representation made to a statutory authority would amount to dereliction of duty.
With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition was allowed and the court ordered the Respondents to consider the representation filed by the Petitioner within 12 weeks.
Case No.- W.P.(MD) No.9156 of 2024
Case Name- C. Chandran. vs Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Tirunelveli) Ltd & Ors.
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 189
Counsel for the Petitioner- Mr.R.Murugan
Counsel for Respondents- Mr.D.Jebaraj – for R1 & R2 Standing Counsel : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh – for R3 Standing Counsel
Click Here To Read/Download Order