Madras High Court
Public Health Department Health ... vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 18 January, 2021
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 18.01.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
Public Health Department Health Inspector Association,
Rep. by its President
R.Paneer Selvam ... Appellant / Petitioner
Vs.
1.State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Principal Secretary,
Department of Health and Family Welfare,
Secretariat, St. George Fort,
Chennai.
2.The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine,
O/o. The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine,
Thenampettai,
Chennai. ... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to
set aside the order in W.P(MD)No.12129 of 2013 dated 26.07.2013
on the file of this Court and allow the writ petition.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Aswin Rajasimma for
Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy
For Respondents : Mr.K.P.Narayanakumar
Special Government Pleader
1/6
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.)
The Writ Appeal is preferred by the appellant Association
challenging the order passed in W.P(MD)No.12129 of 2013, dated
26.07.2013.
2.Brief facts of the case are as follows:
The members of the appellant Association were appointed
only in the year 2006. They had sought for retrospective notional
fixation of the date of appointment, prior to 2003. The
appellant/Health Inspectors Association of Public Health
Department, Theni District, represented by its President, had filed
the writ petition seeking for a Mandamus, directing the respondents
to notionally fix the date of appointment of the members of the
Association, in the vacancies, which arose prior to the year 2003
and grant benefits of the Pension Scheme. The said Writ Petition
was dismissed by the learned single Judge. Challenging the same,
the present Writ Appeal is preferred.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
3.Heard learned counsel appearing on either side and perused
the materials available on record.
4. The point to be decided in this writ appeal is no longer
res integra. There was a Full Bench reference in W.A.Nos.158 of
2016 and batch of cases, dated 03.12.2019[The Government
of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Public
Works Department, Secretariat, Chennai vs.
R.Kaliyamoorthy], in which, the above question was answered.
The Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court has passed the following order,
which reads as follows:-
“46.In the light of the above, we answer the
reference as follows:-
(i) Those who are freshly appointed on or after
01.04.2003 are not entitled to pension in view of
proviso to Rule 2 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules,
1978 inserted by G.O.Ms.No.259, dated 06.08.2003.
(ii) Those Government servants / employees
appointed prior to 01.04.2003 whether on temporary or
permanent basis in terms of Rule 10 (a)(i) 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,
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
or on consolidated pay or on honorarium or daily wage
basis and if such services were regularised before
01.04.2003, half of service rendered shall be counted
for 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
Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules and
absorbed into regular service after 01.04.2003 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
01.04.2003 but were absorbed in regular service after
01.04.2003 will not be entitled to count half of their
past service for the purpose of determination of
qualifying service for pension.”
5.Clause (iv) of the above paragraph specifically stated that
the Government servants, who are appointed after the cut-off date
of 01.04.2003, will not be entitled to count half of their past service
for the purpose of determination of qualifying service for pension.
Admittedly, the members of the appellant Association were
appointed only in the year 2006. Hence, they will not be entitled to
the above benefits.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
6.In view of the decision of the Hon'ble Full Bench (cited
supra), the Writ Appeal stands dismissed and the order of the
learned Single Judge is confirmed. No costs.
[P.S.N.,J] [S.K.,J.]
18.01.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
pm
Note :
In view of the present lock
down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of
the order may be utilized
for official purposes, but,
ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall
be the responsibility of the
advocate / litigant
concerned.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.
and
S.KANNAMMAL,J.
pm
To
1.The Principal Secretary,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Department of Health and Family Welfare,
Secretariat, St. George Fort,
Chennai.
2.The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine,
O/o. The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine,
Thenampettai,
Chennai.
W.A(MD)No.885 of 2014
18.01.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
