WA/1015/2025 of The Management Vs P. Arumugam

Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 08-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K. SURENDER Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 and C.M.P.Nos.8275 & 9351 of 2025 Writ Appeal No.1015 of 2025 The Management, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, Chennai 600 002. ..Appellant Vs 1. P.Arumugam S/o.Ponnappa Naicker 2. The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, D.M.S. Complex, Teynampet, Chennai 600 006. ..Respondents Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 18.02.2025 made in Writ Petition No.5403 of 2025. For Appellant : Mr.R.Ramanlaal Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.Vinothraj For Respondents : No appearance [R1] Dr.S.Suriya, Additional Government Pleader [R2] https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 6 Writ Appeal No.1230 of 2025 The Managing Director, Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai) Limited, Pallavan House, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. ..Appellant Vs P.Arumugam ..Respondent Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside the order dated 12.09.2024 made in Writ Petition No.26677 of 2024. For Appellant : Mr.R.Ramanlaal Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.A.Vinothraj For Respondent : No appearance [R1] ***** COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by S.M.Subramaniam, J.) Under assail is the writ order dated 18.02.2025 passed in Writ Petiti on No.5403 of 2025 and the writ order dated 12.09.2024 passed in Writ Petition No.26677 of 2024. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 6 2. The Management of the Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai, is the appellant before this Court. 3. The first respondent one P.Arumugam was appointed as Electrician- Grade III by the State Transport Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, on 07.05.1966. He remained unauthorisedly absent from 19.06.1971 to 15.08.1971. He was terminated from service on 03.10.1974 after conducting departmenta l enquiry. He raised an industrial dispute in I.D.No.861 of 1989 and it was dismissed on 14.07.1994. Subsequently, W.P.No.19317 of 1994 was filed before the High Court and the writ petition was partly allowed on 14.09.2001 directing the appellant herein to pay back wages from 01.11.1988 till the date of superannuation on 31.12.1997. The writ appeal filed by the Management was dismissed at the SR stage. Since the back wages as ordered by the wr it Court in W.P.No.19317 of 1994 was not paid, the first respondent workman filed an appeal under the Payment of Wages Act. The Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, elaborately considered the appeal and directed the a ppellant Management to pay the back wages as determined by the writ Court in the above writ petition. Challenging the said order, the appellant Management filed P.W.A.No.1 of 2023 and the same was dismissed by the Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai, by order dated 01.02.2024. Thereafter, the appellant Management filed a writ petition challenging the said order and t he writ Court considered the findings of the Chief Judge in Payment of Wages Appeal and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 6 found that the appellant Management has not established any acceptable ground for interfering with the order passed by the Chief Judge in the Payme nt of Wages Appeal. The first respondent has also filed W.P.No.26677 of 2024 seeking a direction to the appellant Management to pay the wages a s per the order dated 10.12.2014 in P.W.A.No.10 of 2013, which was confirmed in P.W.A.No.1 of 2023 by order dated 01.03.2024. The writ Court, by order dated 12.09.2024, has directed the appellant Management to implement the order dated 10.12.2014 in P.W.A.No.10 of 2013. 4. It is not disputed by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the appellant Management that W.P.No.19317 of 1994 was partly allowed and the appellant Management was directed to pay back wages from 01.11.1988 till the date of superannuation on 31.12.1997. The writ appeal filed by the appellant Management was also dismissed. Thus, the direction issued by the writ Court to pay back wages from 01.11.1988 till the date of superannuation on 31.12.1997 became final and under the strength of the said order, the workman preferred Payment of Wages Appeal. Thus, t he Chief Judge as well as the writ Court have considered the issues in a right perspective based on the direction issued by the writ Court to pay back wages, w hich became final. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere w ith the writ orders impugned. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 __________ Page5 of 6 Accordingly, the writ appeals stand dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. [S.M.S., J.] [K.S., J.] 08-04-2026 Index: Yes Speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes gm To The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, D.M.S. Complex, Teynampet, Chennai 600 006. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 __________ Page6 of 6 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND K.SURENDER, J. gm Writ Appeal Nos.1015 & 1230 of 2025 08-04-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis