Murugaraj Vs The Managing Director

Murugaraj vs The Managing Director

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Apr 09, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1608810

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1608810
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar
Decided On: Apr 09, 2026
Case Number: WP(MD)/9793/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Murugaraj

Respondent

The Managing Director

Excerpt

before the madurai bench of madras high court dated : 09.04.2026coram:the honourable mr.justice mummineni sudheer kumar murugaraj ... petitioner -vs- 1.the managing director bye pass road madurai-625 016 2.the general manager bye pass road, dindigul ... respondents prayer: petition filed under article 226 of the constitution of india, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to pay interest of rs.2,35,520/- at the rate of 10% towards delayed payment of terminal benefits for the period from 01.06.2024 to 02.12.2025. for petitioner : mr.k.raghul for respondents : mr.s.raja standing counselordermr.s.raja, learned standing counsel, takes notice for the respondent - transport corporation.2. with the consent of both sides, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.3. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent - transport corporation.4. learned counsel on either side unanimously agree that theissue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by various judgments passed by the division bench of this court in w.a.(md) no.403 of 2010 and batch, dated 09.04.2014 and w.a.(md) no.1419 of 2021 and batch, dated 26.07.2021.5. in the said circumstances, this writ petition is allowed and therespondents are directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment of the petitioner's terminal benefits from the date of his retirement till the date on which those benefits are paid to the petitioner. the respondents are further directed to comply with the said direction as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. no costs.ncc : yes / no index : yes / no internet : yes / no krkmummineni sudheer kumar, j.krk

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 09.04.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR Murugaraj ... Petitioner -vs- 1.The Managing Director Bye Pass Road Madurai-625 016 2.The General Manager Bye Pass Road, Dindigul ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to pay interest of Rs.2,35,520/- at the rate of 10% towards delayed payment of terminal benefits for the period from 01.06.2024 to 02.12.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Raghul For Respondents : Mr.S.Raja Standing Counsel

ORDER

Mr.S.Raja, learned Standing Counsel, takes notice for the respondent - Transport Corporation.

2. With the consent of both sides, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent - Transport Corporation.

4. Learned counsel on either side unanimously agree that the

issue involved in this writ petition is squarely covered by various Judgments passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.403 of 2010 and batch, dated 09.04.2014 and W.A.(MD) No.1419 of 2021 and batch, dated 26.07.2021.

5. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is allowed and the

respondents are directed to pay interest at the rate of 6% per annum for the belated payment of the petitioner's terminal benefits from the date of his retirement till the date on which those benefits are paid to the petitioner. The respondents are further directed to comply with the said direction as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of five months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No krk

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

krk

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties Murugaraj vs The Managing Director Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar