1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 21.09.2022
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice PARESH UPADHYAY
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.A.No.2163 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.16124 of 2022
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
through its Secretary,
Department of School Education,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
2.The Director of School Education,
D.P.I. Campus,
College Road, Chennai.
3.The Joint Director of School Education
(Vocational),
College Road, Chennai.
4.The Chief Educational Officer,
Salem District.
5.The District Educational Officer,
Edapadi, Salem District. ..Appellants
Vs
1.S.Madhu
2.The Accountant General,
(Accounts and Establishments),
361, Anna Salai,
Teynampet, Chennai – 18. ..Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
Appeal preferred under Clause XV of Letters Patent against the
order dated 09.09.2021 made in W.P.No.19083 of 2021.
For Appellants .. Mr.Abishek Moorthy,
Govt. Advocate
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.) This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 09.09.2021 in W.P.No.19083 of 2021 in and by which the learned single Judge had allowed the prayer of the writ petitioner to include 50% of the service rendered by the writ petitioner as Double Part Time Vocational Teacher from 01.07.1987 to 15.10.1992 for the purpose of the pension and pensionary benefits.
2. On a perusal of the order, it would be clear that the very issue was referred to Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Government of Tamil Nadu Vs. R.Kaliyamoorthy and others (W.A.No.158 of 2016 etc., batch dated 03.12.2019) in which the Full Bench answered the issue in favour of the writ petitioners and the learned single Judge had only followed the dictum of the Full Bench and as a matter of fact, granted the relief. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3
3. Mr.Abishek Moorthy, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants would vehemently contest that the Full Bench decision is not applicable to the instant case.
4. On a perusal of the judgment of the Full Bench referred to above, it is clear that the issue is very much covered by the Full Bench judgment and the other submission that there is a delay on the part of the writ petitioner in approaching the Court is also without any merits as the prayer is with reference to the grant of pension and pensionary benefits.
5. We do not see any infirmity in the order of learned single Judge. Therefore, finding no merits, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(P.U.J.,) (D.B.C.J.,) 21.09.2022 Index:Yes/No mmi/14 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4 PARESH UPADHYAY, J.
and D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
mmi W.A.No.2163 of 2022 21.09.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis