The Labour Officer(Social ... vs M.Jothi
2021 Latest Caselaw 9552 Mad

                                                                                W.A.No.441 of 2021


                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED : 15.04.2021

                                                           CORAM :

                                    THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
                                                     AND
                                     THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

                                                    W.A.No.441 of 2021


                      The Labour Officer(Social Security Scheme)
                      No.24, 1st Cross Street,
                      Seetharam Nagar,
                      Pudhupalayam,
                      Cuddalore - 1.                                                 ..Appellant


                                                             Vs


                      1.M.Jothi

                      2.Tamil Nadu Manual Workers Welfare Board
                        Rep. by its Secretary,
                        G1333, Chinthamani Co-operative Commercial
                         Complex,
                        Anna Nagar East, Chennai - 600 102.                       ..Respondents



                      Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set

                      aside the order dated 19.06.2014 made in W.P.No.30028 of 2013.

                                    For Appellant      :          Mr.J.Pothiraj
                                                                  Special Government     Pleader

                                    For Respondents :             Mr.Balan Haridas for R1
                                                                  No appearance for R2



http://www.judis.nic.in
                      Page 1 of 5
                                                                                            W.A.No.441 of 2021


                                                       JUDGMENT

(Delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.)

The only question for consideration in this appeal is as to

whether the pension will have to be reckoned from the date of

sanction or from the date of retirement.

2. The learned Single Judge has given his finding in para

5 to 7, which read as under:-

"5.A counter affidavit is filed by the second respondent to sustain the impugned order stating that the impugned order is based on the proceedings dated 27.12.2012 of the Commissioner of Labour and the second respondent has relied on paragraph No.5 of the proceedings of the Commissioner, which is extracted hereunder:

"5.The Commissioner of Labour once again suggested that while sanctioning the pension claim applications, the procedure adopted in the Revenue Department in disbursing of old age pension(QAP) should be followed and the date of sanction by the L.O.(SSS) to be taken into account for sanctioning pension."

6.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Advocate for the respondents.

http://www.judis.nic.in

W.A.No.441 of 2021

7.I am of the view that the proceedings of the Commissioner has no legal sanctity firstly. Further, paragraph (5) is also not clear that pension shall be paid from the date of sanction of the concerned Labour Officers. If paragraph 5 of the proceedings is understood in the way as the second respondent did, the same would lead to anomalous situation and it would depend upon the sweet will of the sanctioning authority, as pension shall be paid from the date of passing of the order of the Labour Officer. If the Scheme provides that the manual workers, who have completed 60 years, shall be paid pension, the proceedings of the Commissioner cannot prescribe a procedure in violation of the Scheme. Hence, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to pension from 01.03.2013 and not from 01.08.2013, the date of passing of order by the sanctioning authority of the pension. The reliance placed by the second respondent on the proceedings of the Commissioner has no legal sanctity, particularly, when it is not in dispute that the petitioner has reached 60 years on 28.02.2013 and the right to pension accrues from 01.03.2013 as per the Statutory Scheme 2006, which cannot be taken away by the Commissioner or by any Authority. Hence, the impugned order is quashed and a direction is issued to the second respondent to pay pension to the petitioner from 01.03.2013 onwards within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. http://www.judis.nic.in

W.A.No.441 of 2021

The writ petition is allowed. No Costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed."

3. We are in respectful agreement with the reasoning of

the learned Single Judge. Pension enures to an employee after

retirement. It is not a bounty. It cannot be reckoned from the date

of sanction which depends upon external factors. In such view of

the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the

learned Single Judge.

4. The writ appeal stands dismissed accordingly. No

costs. Consequently, connected C.M.P.No.1748 of 2021 is closed.

                                                                  (M.M.S., J.)     (R.N.M., J.)
                                                                            15.04.2021
                      Internet : Yes/No
                      ssm



                      To:


                      The Secretary,

Tamil Nadu Manual Workers Welfare Board G1333, Chinthamani Co-operative Commercial Complex, Anna Nagar East, Chennai - 600 102.

http://www.judis.nic.in

W.A.No.441 of 2021

M.M.SUNDRESH,J.

and R.N.MANJULA,J.

(ssm)

W.A.No.441 of 2021

15.04.2021

http://www.judis.nic.in