Madras High Court
K.Raju vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 10 March, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 10.03.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
K.Raju ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu
rep by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Forest and Environment Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
Panagal Building, Saidapet,
Chennai.
3.The Conservator of Forest,
Megamalai Conservation Division,
Theni-625 531.
4.Divisonal Forest Officer,
Varusanadu Soil Conservation Division,
Theni- 625 531.
5.The Principal Accountant General of Tamil Nadu,
Office of the Accountant General,
Teynampet,
Chennai. ... Respondents
1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to sanction
and disburse the pension to the petitioner by counting half of the service
rendered by the petitioner from 01.08.1986 to 01.09.2014 as Plot
Watcher on a daily wage basis along with regular service rendered from
01.09.2014 till 31.08.2017, with all consequential benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Anand Chandrasekar
for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates
For R1 to R4 : Mr.M.Muthugeethayan
Special Government Pleader
For R5 : Mr.P.Gunasekaran
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner for a direction to the
respondents to sanction and disburse the pension to the petitioner by
counting half of the service rendered by the petitioner from 01.08.1986 to
01.09.2014 as Plot Watcher on a daily wage basis along with regular
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
service rendered from 01.09.2014 till 31.08.2017, with all consequential
benefits.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Plot
Watcher in the Forest Department on daily wage basis and he was
continuously engaged by the respondents without any break. Thereafter,
he was promoted as Forest Watcher on 1.9.2014 in the regular scale of
pay and retired from service as Forest Watcher on 31.8.2017. After
retirement, as the petitioner was not given pensionary benefits, he sent a
representation dated 4.11.2017 to the respondents praying for grant of
pension taking into account 50% of service rendered by the petitioner on
a daily wages basis along with regular service. Since the same was not
considered, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that
this Court may issue a direction to the respondents to count half of the
service rendered by the petitioner as a Plot Watcher from 01.08.1986 to
01.09.2014 along with regular service rendered by him as a Forest
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
Watcher from 01.09.2014 till 31.08.2017.
4. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing
for the respondents submitted that the issue that arose in the present writ
petition is no longer res integra and there are two conflicting decisions
rendered by the Division Bench of this Court and that the matter was
referred before the Full Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.158 of 2016 etc.,
Batch, dated 03.12.2019 and the above question was answered. The
person, who was firstly appointed on or after 01.04.2003, is not entitled
for pension. The relevant portion of the judgment of the Full Bench of
this Court is as follows:
“4.Such a reference came to be made by the
Division Bench on noticing that there are two conflicting
decisions rendered by the Division Benches of this Court.
In one of the judgments rendered by the Division Bench
of the Madurai Bench of his Court in W.A(MD)Nos.587,
605, 606 and 1024 of 2014 on 03.12.2014, it was held
that persons, who were absorbed and/or regularized to
service after 01.04.2003 were not entitled to count half of
the past service rendered by them for the purpose of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
conferment of pensionary benefits along with the service
rendered by them after regularization. Another Division
Bench of the Madurai Bench of this Court, in its
judgment dated 09.09.2015, in W.A(MD)No.760 of 2013
held that such persons, whose service came to be
regularized after 01.04.2003 were entitled and/or eligible
to count half of the services rendered by them on daily
wage basis prior to their regularization, for the purpose
of conferment of pensionary benefits. Thus, this contrary
view taken by two Division Bench of this Court has led to
the present reference to his Full Bench.”
5.The facts in the present case are not in dispute. Admittedly, the
petitioner has entered into service in the year 1986 as Plot Watcher and
he was promoted as Forest Watcher in the year 2014 and thereafter, he
was retired from service in the year 2017. On a perusal of the Full Bench
decision (cited supra), it is seen that the Government Servants, who are
appointed on or after 01.04.2003 are not entitled for pension. In the
present case, the petitioner's service was regularized only in the year
2014 and hence, he was not entitled to get such a benefit. Hence, the
relief sought for in the writ petition cannot be granted.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
10.03.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
PJL
To
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Forest and Environment Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
Panagal Building, Saidapet,
Chennai.
3.The Conservator of Forest,
Megamalai Conservation Division,
Theni-625 531.
4.Divisonal Forest Officer,
Varusanadu Soil Conservation Division,
Theni- 625 531.
5.The Principal Accountant General of Tamil Nadu,
Office of the Accountant General,
Teynampet,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
PJL
W.P.(MD)No.22403 of 2017
10.03.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
