Madras High Court
The Principal Secretary To vs S.Muthusamy ... 1St on 5 July, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1263 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1263 of 2021
and
CMP(MD).No.5293 of 2021
1. The Principal Secretary to
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj
Department,
Fort St.George, Secretariat,
Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director of Rural Development and
Panchayat Raj,
Panagal Building,
Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.
3. The District Collector,
Madurai, Madurai District. ... Appellants/Respondents 1,2,4
Vs.
1. S.Muthusamy ... 1st Respondent/Writ Petitioner
2. S.Ganasundaram
3. Sahul Hameed
4. T.Gopala Krishnan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/5
W.A.(MD)No.1263 of 2021
5. S.Balasubramanian
6. K.Ganesan
7. R.Narayanan
8. S.Karuppanan
9. B.Muthuraj
10. R.Ramachandran
11. The District Collector,
Theni District, Theni.
... Respondents/Petitioners 5,6,9,
1 to 4,7,8,10 and third respondent in W.P.
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order of
this Court made in W.P.(MD) No.17543 of 2013, dated 18.09.2014.
For Appellants : Mr.A.K.Manickam
Standing Counsel for Government
For Respondents : Ms.J.Saranya
for
Mr.N.Sathish Babu
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
Heard Mr.A.K.Manickam, learned Government Counsel appearing for
the appellants and Ms.J.Saranya, learned counsel for Mr.N.Sathish Babu,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1263 of 2021
2. This appeal filed by the Government is directed against the order
dated 18.09.2014 in W.P(MD).No.17543 of 2013.
3. The question involved in the appeal is whether the respondents-writ
petitioners are entitled to seek for counting the service rendered by them in the
post of Part-Time Panchayat Clerk, for the purpose of pension and other
retirement benefits. It is not disputed by the appellants that the respondents-writ
petitioners' case would be squarely covered in paragraph No.3A of the G.O.
(2b)No.80, Local Administration and Panchayat Department, dated 25.09.2013.
The said conditions read as follows:
"nkny ehd;fpy; gof;fg;gl;l murhizapy; fpuhk Cuhl;rpapy; gzpg[hpe;j
fhyq;fspy; 50 tpGf;ffhl;loid Xa;t{jpaj;jpw;F fzf;fpLtJ bjhlh;ghf
fPH;f;fz;l Mizfs; btspaplg;gl;Ls;sd.
m) "Cuhl;rp cjtpahsh; gzpaplj;jpy; epiy-1>epiy-2 vd ,U epiyfsp;y;
ve;j epiyapd; fPGk; KGneuk; gzp g[hpe;jhYk;> nkYk; KGneu Cuhl;rp vGj;juhfg;
gzpg[hpe;J ,Ue;jhYk;. mth;fs; gzpKwptpd;wp 01.04.2003f;F Kd;dh; ,sepiy
cjtpahsh; epiyapy; muRg; gzpapy; <h;f;fg;gl;oUg;gpd; mth;fs; 01.01.1961f;Fg;
gpd; gzpg[hpe;j bjhFg;g{jpag; gzpf; fhyj;jpy; 50 tpGf;ffhL gzpf;fhyj;jpid
muRg; gzpf;fhyj;Jld; nrh;j;J Xa;t{jpag; gad;fSf;F vLj;Jf; bfhs;s
mDkjpf;fg;gLfpwJ."
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1263 of 2021
4. The appellants did not dispute the fact that the respondents-writ
petitioners would squarely fall within the ambit of the above conditions.
5. In the light of the same, the relief sought for by the respondents-
writ petitioners was liable to be granted and was rightly granted by the learned
Writ Court.
6. For the above reasons, we find no ground to interfere with the order
passed in the writ petition. Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Index :Yes/No (T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
Internet :Yes/No 05.07.2021
pkn
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1263 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
W.A.(MD)No.1263 of 2021
05.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
