K.Tamilselvi, vs The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd. — WP(MD)/15032/2026

Case under Others Section other. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 05th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCMD010711492026

Filing Number

WP(MD)/43529/2026

Filing Date

02-Jun-2026

Registration No

WP(MD)/15032/2026

Registration Date

03-Jun-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

Coram

Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Service ( 140 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

05-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Others Section other

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.K.Tamilselvi,

    Adv. A.RAHUL, ,HEMABHARATHI R

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.

  2. 2.The General Manager,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-Jun-2026

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer KumarView PDF

    The Madurai High Court allowed K. Tamilselvi's petition and directed Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation to pay 6% per annum interest on delayed death-cum-terminal benefits (Provident Fund, Gratuity, Terminal Leave salary) of her deceased husband from his retirement date (30.06.2023) until payment. The respondents must comply within five months, with both parties agreeing the issue was covered by established precedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-Jun-2026

    For Admission (Transport - Interest Matters)

    Honourable Mr.Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar

  4. 02-Jun-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP(MD)/15032/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Madurai High Court allowed K. Tamilselvi's petition and directed Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation to pay 6% per annum interest on delayed death-cum-terminal benefits (Provident Fund, Gratuity, Terminal Leave salary) of her deceased husband from his retirement date (30.06.2023) until payment. The respondents must comply within five months, with both parties agreeing the issue was covered by established precedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case