Madras High Court
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs Thiru K.Muthu on 23 April, 2021
WA.No.893/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 23.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM
WA.No.893/2021 & CMP.No.5166/2021
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Secretary to Government,
School Education Department
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director of Government Examinations
Directorate of Government Examinations
College Road, Chennai 600 006.
3.The Regional Deputy Director of
Government Examinations
Directorate of Government Examinations
College Road, Chennai-6. .. Appellants
Versus
Thiru K.Muthu .. respondent/writ
petitioner
1
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
Prayer:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against
the order dated 13.04.2018 made in WP.No.9010/2018.
For Appellants : Mr.C.Munusamy
Special Government Pleader [Edn]
For Respondent : Mr.G.Elanchezhiyan
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,
through Video Conferencing]
1. By consent, the writ appeal is taken up for final disposal and is
disposed of by this judgment.
2. Mr.G.Elanchezhiyan, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the
respondent/writ petitioner.
3. The respondent/writ petitioner would claim by virtue of the
sponsoring of his name by the jurisdictional Employment Exchange
Office, he was initially selected and appointed as Section Writer on
daily wage basis in the year 1988 by the 3rd appellant/3rd respondent
and he joined duty on 12.08.1988 and was continuously engaged with
some artificial break till 19.10.2006.
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
4. The respondent/writ petitioner, while working as Section Writer, on
daily wage basis, got temporary appointment as Record Clerk on
Time Scale of Pay in terms of the orders dated 19.10.2006 made in
G.O.[Ms] No.203, School Education Department and also vide
proceedings dated 20.10.2006 issued by the Regional Deputy Director
of Government Examinations and accordingly, joined the said post on
20.10.2006 [FN]. The services of the respondent/writ petitioner got
regularised on 20.10.2006 in the post of Record Clerk vide
proceedings of the 3rd appellant/3rd respondent dated 06.02.2008 and
subsequently, his probation was also satisfactorily declared on
02.02.2009 vide proceedings of the 3rd appellant/3rd respondent with
effect from 13.12.2008. The respondent/writ petitioner, on attaining
the age of superannuation, was permitted to retire from service as
Record Clerk on 31.03.2015.
5. According to the respondent/writ petitioner, he had rendered 27 years
of active service as Section Writer and Record Clerk for which, he has
been granted pensionary benefits and therefore, citing various
precedents, had also submitted representations and since it has not
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
been considered and disposed of, he came forward to file
WP.No.9010/2018, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus,
directing the official respondents to count 50% of service rendered by
him from 12.08.1988 to 19.10.2006 along with regular service from
20.10.2006 for the purpose of granting pension to the respondent/writ
petitioner and consequently grant pension with all benefits and pay
arrears to him.
6. The learned Single Judge, after taking note of Rule 11 of the Tamil
Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 in respect of the qualifying service as well
as the judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court reported
in 2014 [2] CTC 777 [Union of India V. K.Punniyakotti], and other
orders, had disposed of the said writ petition with a positive direction
vide impugned order dated 13.04.2018 and aggrieved by the same,
the present writ appeal is preferred.
7. Mr.C.Munusamy, learned Special Government Pleader [Edn]
appearing for the appellants would submit that the matter in issue is
squarely covered by a decision rendered by a Full Bench of this Court
reported in 2019 [6] CTC 705 [The Government of Tamil Nadu
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
rep.by its Secretary to Government, Public Works Department,
Secretariat, Chennai-600 009 and others Vs. R.Kaliyamoorthy] and
prays for interference.
8. Per contra, Mr.G.Elanchezhiyan, learned counsel for the
respondent/writ petitioner would submit that the learned Judge has
rightly taken note of the rule position and having found that the matter
in issue is squarely covered by various pronouncements of this Court,
has rightly granted the relief and hence, prays for dismissal of this
writ petition.
9. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and also
perused the materials placed before it.
10. It is relevant to extract paragraph No.45 of the above cited Full Bench
judgment reported in 2019 [6] CTC 705 [The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Secretary to Government, Public Works Department,
Secretariat, Chennai-9 and Others V. R.Kaliyamoorthy]:-
''45.In the light of the above, we answer the reference
as follows:-
i. Those, who are freshly appointed on or after
1.4.2003 are not entitled to Pension in view of
Proviso to Rule 2 of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
1978 inserted by G.O.Ms.259, dated 6.8.2003.
ii. Those Government servants/Employees
appointed prior to 1.4.2003 whether on
temporary or permanent basis in terms of Rule
10[a][1] of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate
Service Rules will be entitled to get Pension as
per the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.
iii. In case, a Government Employee / servant had
also rendered service in Non-Provincialised
service, or on Consolidated pay or on
Honararium or Daily Wage basis and if such
services were regularised before 1.4.2003, half
of such service rendered shall be counted fro
the purpose of conferment of pensionary
benefits.
iv. Those Government servants, who were
appointed in the aforesaid four categories
before the cut off date and later appointed
under Rule 10[a][i] of the Tamil Nadu State
and Subordinate Service Rules before 1.4.2003
and absorbed into Regular service after
1.4.2003 will not be entitled to count half of
their past service for the purpose of
determination of qualifying service for Pension.
v. Those Government Servants, who were
appointed in the aforesaid four categories
before 1.4.2003 but were absorbed in Regular
service after 1.4.2003 will be entitled to count
half of their past service for the purpose of
determination of qualifying service for
Pension.''
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
11. A perusal of the materials would disclose that the petitioner joined the
service in the year 1988 as Section Writer on daily wage basis and she
was brought into time scale of pay on 20.10.2006 and his services
came to be regularised on 20.10.2006 and retired from service on
31.03.2015. The grant of time scale of pay as well as regularisation
came into being after the cut-off date on 01.04.2003 and as such, in
the considered opinion of the Court, the judgment rendered by the
Full Bench of this Court have full application to the case on hand.
12. In the result, the writ appeal stands allowed setting aside the order
dated 13.04.2018 made in WP.No.9010/2018, and consequently, the
writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[MSNJ] [PRMJ]
23.04.2021
AP
Internet: Yes
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu
School Education Department
Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director of Government Examinations
Directorate of Government Examinations
College Road, Chennai 600 006.
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
3.The Regional Deputy Director of
Government Examinations
Directorate of Government Examinations
College Road, Chennai-6.
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA.No.893/2021
M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,
AND
P.RAJAMANICKAM, J.,
AP
WA.No.893/2021
23.04.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
