PARVATHA DASARATHAN Vs. COMMISSIONER MADURAI CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to release a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards gratuity which was withheld on account of certain audit objections.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that though the audit objections have been rectified and the petitioner has also sent a representation to the respondent on 7.3.2007, requesting the respondent to disburse the gratuity, the respondent/Corporation has failed to take action. In these circumstances, the petitioner is constrained to seek for the relief as stated supra.

(3.) IT is not in dispute that the portion of the gratuity withheld has not been disbursed immediately after the rectification of the audit objections. Therefore, the respondents are certainly liable to pay interest at the rate provided under' Rule 45-A. Rule 45-A(b) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules provides ten percent interest per annum, if the gratuity is, delayed and as per sub-Rule (2) of Rule 45-A of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, the Government shall be the authority competent to sanction pension.