Madras High Court
G.Veerapandian ... vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 29 July, 2021
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :29.07.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
G.Veerapandian (PPO.No.R0315678/RD) .. Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of Rural Development &
Panchayat Raj,
Panagal Building, Saidapet,
Chennai – 600 015.
3.The District Collector,
Cuddalore District,
Cuddalore.
4.The Principal Accountant General (A&E)
Tamil Nadu,
No.361, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 018. ..
Respondents
1
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
Prayer: Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for
issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to count 50%
services rendered by the petitioner in the post of part time Panchayat clerk
from 01.08.1980 to 26.01.1995 for the purpose of granting pension along
with regular service from 27.01.1995 till 30.06.2015 in accordance with the
directions given by the Hon'ble Division Bench judgment 259/2016 etc.,
dated 10.03.2016.
For Petitioner : Ms.T.Hemalatha
For R1 to R3 : Mr.K.Tippu Sulthan
Government Advocate
For R4 : M/s.T.S.Selvarani
Standing Counsel
ORDER
By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for
final disposal.
2. The petitioner herein had originally served as part time
Panchayat clerk from 01.08.1980 to 26.01.1995. The claim of the petitioner
is that 50% of his services for the aforesaid period, requires to be taken into
consideration for the purpose of grant of pension along with his regular
service.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
3. The aforesaid issue has come up for consideration in batch of
writ petitions before this Court in W.P.No.19264 of 2014 etc., and orders
passed therein, including the decision of the Hon'ble Full Bench and this
Court had held therein that the 50% services of said part time Panchayat
clerk, can be included for the purpose of calculating the grant of pension.
One such order passed by this Court in the case of A.Khadar vs. The
Government of Tamil Nadu, Rural Development & Panchayat Raj
Department and others, passed in W.P.No.10865 of 2019 dated
15.07.2021, reads as follows:
“2. The petitioner herein had rendered services
under the respondents herein as a Part Time Panchayat Clerk
from 01.09.1981 to 31.12.1990. The grievance of the
petitioner is that 50% of his services rendered in the post of
Part Time Panchayat Clerk was taken into consideration for
the purpose of computing grant of pension and therefore, the
learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the order
requires to be set aside. In support of her contention, the
learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue with
regard to the eligibility to take into account the earlier
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
services of the Part Time Panchayat Clerk came up for
consideration in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.No.19264 of
2014, etc. and by order dated 30.06.2014, it was held that,
50% of the past services of the Part Time Panchayat Clerk has
to be taken for the purpose of computing the total period of
services for the pensionary benefits. It is also her contention
that the order of the learned Single Judge in the batch of writ
petitions came to be affirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of
this Court in W.A.No.191 of 2016 dated 23.02.2016. A similar
view was taken by the other Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court in W.A.No.612 of 2016 dated 24.06.2016 and
W.A.No.745 of 2019 dated 11.03.2019.
3. The orders of the learned Single Judge, as
confirmed by the Division Benches, has also been
implemented by the first respondent herein and one such
order of implementation is in G.O.Ms.No.111 Rural
Development and Panchayat Raj (PA5) Department, dated
14.03.2016. The aforesaid proposition laid down by the
learned Single Judge as well as the Hon'ble Division Bench
squarely applies to the facts of the present case. As such, the
petitioner herein is entitled to succeed.”
4. Since, the petitioner is similarly placed, as that of the petitioner
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
in the aforesaid case, he would also be entitled for the same relief.
Accordingly, there shall be a direction to the respondents herein to count
50% of the services rendered by the petitioner in the post of part time
Panchayat clerk along with 50% services already taken for the purpose of
granting pension, together with his regular service and consequently, revise
the petitioner's pension. Such an exercise shall be completed atleast within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. However, there
shall be no order as to costs.
29.07.2021
Index:Yes/No
Speaking order / non-speaking order
Pns
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
M.S.RAMESH, J.
Pns
To
1.Principal Secretary to Government,
The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of Rural Development &
Panchayat Raj,
Panagal Building, Saidapet,
Chennai – 600 015.
3.The District Collector,
Cuddalore District,
Cuddalore.
4.The Principal Accountant General (A&E)
Tamil Nadu,
No.361, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 018.
W.P.No.16381 of 2020
29.07.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
