Madras High Court
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs K.S.Devendiran on 28 April, 2021
W.A.No.2 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED:28.04.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM
W.A.No.2 of 2019
and C.M.P.No.18 of 2019
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Secretary to Government,
Rural Development Department,
Fort.St.George,
Chennai 09.
2.The Director,
Local Fund Audit Department,
Kuralagam, Chennai 108.
3.The Assistant Director,
Local Fund Audit Department,
Kuralagam, Chennai 108.
4.The Collector,
Villupuram District,
Villupuram.
5.The Commissioner,
Sankarapuram Panchayat Union,
Villupuram District.
....Appellants
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 1
W.A.No.2 of 2019
Vs
K.S.Devendiran ..Respondent
Prayer:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent
against the order passed in W.P.No.16679/2015 dated 03.10.2016 passed
by this Court.
For Appellants : Ms.A.Srijayanthi
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
[Order of the Court was made by M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.]
By consent, the Writ Appeal is taken up and disposed of by this
judgment.
2. The respondent / writ petitioner had filed W.P.No.16679 of
2015, praying for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling
for the records of the 3rd appellant dated 19.09.2014 and quash the same
with consequential direction to pay the revised pension and arrears of
pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dated
25.08.2009, by taking into consideration the 50% of the services
rendered by the writ petitioner prior to 01.10.1984. The said Writ Petition
came to be allowed along with batch of other writ petitions vide common
W.A.No.2 of 2019
order dated 03.10.2015 and making a challenge to the same, the official
respondents had filed this Writ Appeal.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
appellants would submit that prior to 01.10.1984, the petitioner and other
similarly placed persons were brought under the regular scale of pay and
no benefits have been sanctioned to them like the other full time
Government employees and only from that day onwards the part time
dispensaries were working as regular dispensaries and as such the
impugned order warrants interference.
4. It is fairly brought to the knowledge of this Court that the Full
Bench of this Court in the decision reported in 2019 (6) CTC 705
(Government of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary to Government, Public
Works Department, Chennai 600 009 Vs. R.Kaliyamoorthy), has
considered the said issue and laid down the preposition and in the light of
the same, prays for appropriate orders.
W.A.No.2 of 2019
5. This Court has considered the arguments advanced and also
perused the materials placed before it.
6. It is relevant to extract paragraph no.45 of the above cited
judgment:
''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 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
W.A.No.2 of 2019
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.''
7. In the light of the fact that the service of the respondent / writ
petitioner came to be regularised prior to the cut off date dated
W.A.No.2 of 2019
01.04.2003, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order
passed in the Writ Petition does not warrants interference.
8. In the result, the Writ Appeal is dismissed, confirming the order
dated 03.10.2015 made in W.P.NO.16679 of 2015 and as a consequence,
the appellants / official respondents are directed to comply with the order
dated 03.10.2015 passed in the Writ Petition, as confirmed in this
judgment, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order / uploading of the order in the Website and
communicate the decision taken to the respondent / writ petitioner. No
costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.S.N., J.,] [P.R.M., J]
28.04.2021
Index : No
Internet :Yes
sk
W.A.No.2 of 2019
M.SATHYANARAYANAN, J.,
and
P.RAJAMANICKAM, J.,
sk
W.A.No.2 of 2019
28.04.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 7
