ADVOCATE R. KARUNANIDHI, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court

Case Background C. Markandan was appointed as Village Thalaiyari in 1983 and promoted as Village Administrative Officer (VAO) in 2016. Due to an erroneous entry Despite this, the Tahsildar, by order dated 09.02.2023, denied him salary and retirement benefits for the period between 01.02.2018 and 18.03.2019 on the ground of Read more: https://lawtrend.in/employee-not-at-fault-cannot-be-denied-salary-under-no-work-no-pay-rule-madras-high-court/ Read more: https://lawtrend.in/employee-not-at-fault-cannot-be-denied-salary-under-no-work-no-pay-rule-madras-high-court/ n W.P.(MD) No.17863 of 2023, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court ruled that the principle of ‘no work no pay’ cannot be applied Read more: https://lawtrend.in/employee-not-at-fault-cannot-be-denied-salary-under-no-work-no-pay-rule-madras-high-court/

The Madras High Court, in a recent case hearing, held that it is unlawful to apply the ‘No Work, No Pay’ principle when an employee is not at fault but is prevented from performing office duties. The Madurai bench of the high court ordered the respondents to pay the petitioner (C. Makarand) full retirement benefits and quashed the order passed by the Tahsildar earlier. Brief Background C. Makarand started his service as a Village Thalaiyari of Muthu Nagaiahapuram on March 20, 1983. At the time of joining, he submitted his document, including the date of birth proof. However, in 2015, he realised that his date of birth. It is because his date of birth in the records was January 28, 1958, instead of his actual DoB, which is March 23, 1961. When he applied for correction in the details to authorities, his request was rejected. The reason was that correction is allowed only within five years of joining, and that period has passed. However, in 2015, he received a favourable order from a ...

COMPENSATION UNDER VICARIOUS LIABLITY - SINCE THE JUVENILE BOY DIED FOLLOWING PHYSICAL TORTURE AT ILLEGAL POLICE CUSTODY: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has directed the State to pay a compensation of ₹ 25 lakh to the family members of a 17-year-old boy who died following custodial torture at the hands of S.S. Colony police in Madurai in 2019. Justice P. Dhanabal directed the State to pay the compensation in two months. (M Jeya v The Principal Secretary and Others (2023 Live Law (Mad) 256) The Madras High Court increased the compensation amount in a police custodial death case to 25 lakhs from 5 lakhs after a writ petition was filed by the mother of the deceased seeking just and reasonable compensation of Rs. 50,00,000 (Fifty lakhs) and a government job for her family. The petitioner alleged that her son died due to police custodial torture. A Bench of Justice P. Dhanabal followed a method followed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cases to calculate the compensation a...

VISUALLY CHALLENGED PERSON – DIRECTION ISSUED TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT AS PER THE RIGHTS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITY ACT,2016. High Court has granted relief to a Police who was discharged from service after acquiring 100% blindness during service and being declared medically unfit for service. High Court allowed the Writ Petition and issued direction to reinstate the Petitioner into service and provide all benefits. (Ganesan Vs The Commandant, Tamil Nadu Special Police – 2025 Live Law (Mad) Page 22). Published and Reported in https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/madras-high-court/ganesan-v-the-commandant-wpmdno26560-of-2024-reinstatement-of-visually-impaired-cop-alternative-employment-1565795. The Madras High Court recently came to the aid of a visually impaired Policeman who was working as a Nayak in the Tamil Nadu Special Police Force by ordering his reinstatement after noting that he had acquired the disability while he was performing his duty. The Writ Petition be...

GOVERNMENT JOB CANNOT BE DENIED BY STATE ON THE GROUND THAT THE PETITIONER HAS PARTICIPATED IN THE PEACEFUL PROTEST DURING COLLEGE DAYS: High Court held that right to protest is fundamental rights and issued direction to the Police Department to grant employment. ( Arunkanth v State of Tamil Nadu (2023 Live Law (Mad) 224)