High Court · 2025

W.P.No.44005 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 17.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANW.P.No.44005 of 2025G.Ravichandran... Petitioner-Vs-1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) Salem Ltd., No.12, Ramakrishna Road, Salem – 07.2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) Salem Ltd., Dharmapuri Region, Dharmapuri.3.The Administrator, TNSTC Employees Pension Fund Trust, Office of the SETC HO, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002.... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to re-fix the pay of the petitioner by adopting 2.57 multiplier/matrix on par with 7th pay revision from the date of promotion with subsequent increments and to revise the terminal benefits and pension further to disburse the difference amount and pension arrears along with 6% interest with the stipulated time as may be fixed by this Court.Page No.1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.44005 of 2025For Petitioner:Mr.J.PradeepFor Respondents:Mrs.Dakshayani ReddySenior Counselfor Mrs.Madhuri Donthi ReddyStanding Counsel [R1 & R2]Notice dispensed with [R3]*****O RDER This writ petition has been filed for direction to the respondents to fix the pay of the petitioner by adopting 2.57 multiplier/matrix by taking into account of 7th pay commission and to pay consequent benefits.2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2. With the consent of both sides, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. Since no adverse order has been passed against the 3rd respondent, notice to the 3rd respondent is dispensed with.3. The petitioner was appointed in the respondent corporation and retired from service under voluntary retirement scheme. There were two kinds of pay pattern in the State Transport Undertakings i.e. firstly, for workers, wages revised once in three years as per settlement arrived at under Section 12(3) of Industrial Disputes Act and secondly, for Supervisors (Superintendent, Junior Page No.2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.44005 of 2025Engineer, Assistant Engineer) and Managerial Cadre Officers (Assistant Manager, Deputy Manager, Senior Deputy Manager and Manager) on par with Government servants based on pay commission recommendations once in 10 years. On the request made by the respondent, Government passed order in G.O.Ms.No.220 Transport (d) Department dated 23.07.2018 constituting a committee to recommend for fixation of pay for the employees who are promoted on or after 01.01.2016 and also migrated to Government pattern of scale of pay. As per the Government order, 2.44 multiplier factor was applied to Technical / Administrative Supervisor category employees who have been promoted and migrated to Government scale of pay. Accordingly, the Government directed State Transport Undertakings to implement 2.44 multiplier and fix the salary. Thereafter, the association of the petitioner submitted representation to apply 2.57 multiplier.4. In that regard, arbitrator was appointed and the arbitrator recommended to fix 2.44 multiplier. Accordingly, the Government passed order in G.O.Ms.No.330, Transport Department, dated 31.10.2018. Aggrieved by the same, one of the employees challenged the said Government order in WP(MD).No.3609 of 2020 and by an order, dated 20.06.2023, the Hon'ble Madurai Bench of this Court directed the respondent corporation to re-fix the Page No.3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.44005 of 2025salary by adopting 2.57 multiplier matrix by taking into account of the 7th pay revision. However, the petitioner was not granted the benefit of 2016 settlement arrived under Section 12(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act. For the similarly placed employees who were given the benefit of 2013 wage settlement, their salaries were multiplied by applying 2.57 multiplier. In fact, the order passed by the Single Bench of this Court was confirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD).No.1099 of 2024, which was also confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In view of the same, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 03.08.2025 before the respondents seeking to adopt 2.57 multiplier / pay matrix by taking into account of 7th pay commission and to pay the consequential benefits. However, so far it has not been considered. 5. In this regard, it is relevant to extract the relevant portion of the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of Madurai Bench of this Court in WP(MD).No.1099 of 2024, dated 04.07.2024 as follows:“7.The fixation of pay in respect of the employees, who are working in the appellant Transport Corporation, is fixed under two categories, if employee is workman, he is covered under 12(3) settlement of the Industrial Disputes Act or if the employee is in a supervisory or managerial cadre, he is getting pay as per the Government pattern.Page No.4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.44005 of 20258.After the Tamil Nadu Revision of Pay Rules -2017 came into force, based on the request made by the employees, who had migrated from the workman category to the supervisory category, an One Man Commission was constituted and pursuant to the recommendation of the Committee, the pay fixation by adopting 2.44 multiplier was adopted in respect of those employees, who have been promoted to supervisory or managerial cadre. Subsequently, in view of the representation made by the Union for adopting the multiplier factor of 2.57, an Arbitrator was appointed and pursuant to the award, dated 26.03.2018, the Government issued G.O.(Ms)No.330, Transport (C1) Department, dated 31.10.2018, directing the State Transport Department to continue the existing benefit allowed in G.O(Ms)No.220, Transport (C1) Department, dated 23.07.2018, by applying 2.44 multiplier factor to the technical/administrative supervisory cadre employees, who have been promoted and migrated to Government scale of pay between 11.01.2016 and 31.08.2016 as well as after 01.09.2016 (ie., after getting the benefit of wage settlement-2016) and fix the pay of the above category of employees. Therefore, in view of the above Government Order, an employee, who has migrated from workman category to the supervisory category, between the period of 01.01.2016 to 31.08.2016 and also the employees, who have been migrated after 01.09.2016, who have received the 2016 wage settlement, will be covered by fixing pay scale by adopting 2.44 multiplier factor.………………….10.When G.O.(Ms)No.330, dated 31.10.2018, makes it clear that only the employees, who have been migrated cadre to Government scale of pay, even after 01.06.2016, who get the benefit of 2016 wage settlement, those pay shall be fixed by adopting 2.44 multiplier. Here, admittedly, when Page No.5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.44005 of 2025the first respondent/Writ Petitioner was not given the benefits of 2016-wage settlement and he had been promoted to the supervisory cadre on 04.03.2017 itself, the first respondent is entitled for re-fixation of his pay by adopting 2.57 multiplier/matrix by also taking into account the 7th pay revision.11.By taking note of all the above factual matrix, the learned Judge had arrived at a right conclusion that the first respondent, who had not been provided with the benefits of 2016-wage settlement, will be entitled for pay fixation by adopting 2.57 multiplier, which is perfectly legal and does not warrant any interference by this Court. In such circumstances, the order of the Writ Court is liable to be sustained and accordingly, sustained. The appellant Corporation shall comply with the direction issued by the learned Judge within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”6. In view of the above, the respondent corporation can be directed accordingly. However, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for any benefits since he is a bench sitter. Only after several years from the date of his retirement, he submitted a representation seeking the benefit as per the orders passed by the Madurai Bench of this Court. 7. Therefore, it is made clear that if the petitioner did not already avail the said benefit, the respondent corporation shall fix the pay of the petitioner by Page No.6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.44005 of 2025adopting 2.57 matrix and to disburse the arrears to the petitioner within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this order.8. With the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.17.11.2025Index : Yes/NoNeutral Citation: Yes/NoSpeaking/Non Speaking orderspTo1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) Salem Ltd., No.12, Ramakrishna Road, Salem – 07.2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) Salem Ltd., Dharmapuri Region, Dharmapuri.3.The Administrator, TNSTC Employees Pension Fund Trust, Office of the SETC HO, Thiruvalluvar House, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 600 002.Page No.7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.44005 of 2025G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,spW.P.No.44005 of 202517.11.2025Page No.8 of 8