Madras High Court
S.Thangarajan vs The Deputy Secretary on 12 November, 2021
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.11.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
S.Thangarajan ..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Deputy Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
Anna Salai, Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Labour,
Teynampet, Chennai ..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India
for writ of Certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to
the Letter No.4197/P.D-A1/2011 dated 09.08.2011 passed by the first
respondent herein and the consequential order passed by the second
respondent in Memorandum No. G3/20138/2010 dated 20.09.2011
and quash the same and further direct the respondents to count the
service rendered by the petitioner in the 1st respondent's department
along with regular service for the purpose of pension and other
benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.M.Ramesh
For Respondents : Mr.Karthik Rajan - R1
Mr.T.Arun Kumar, GA - R2
*****
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
ORDER
The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order passed by
the second respondent in Memorandum No. G3/20138/2010 dated
20.09.2011 and direct the respondents to count the service rendered
by the petitioner in the 1st respondent's department along with regular
service for the purpose of pension and other benefits.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned
Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent and the learned
Government Advocate appearing for the 2nd respondent and perused
the documents available on record.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was initially appointed on temporary basis in the office of te
Director of of Technical Education on 16.06.1989 and subsequently in
various departments. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant
on 08.06.2009 by the 2nd respondent and declared probation by
proceedings dated 12.07.2011. Hence, the petitioner has made
representation on 16.04.2010 to the 2nd respondent requesting to
count his previous service rendered in various departments on
temporary basis only for the purpose of pension and other benefits.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
The 2nd respondent without considering the same, has rejected the
request made by the petitioner. Hence the present writ petition.
4. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate
appearing for the 2nd respondent, citing the judgment of the Hon'ble
Full Bench of this Court in.W.A.Nos. 158 of 2016 etc., batch dated
03.12.2019, has submitted that the issue on hand has already been
considered by the Hon'ble Full Bench elaborately and passed orders,
therefore the rejection of the petitioner's request by the 2nd
respondent is valid and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
The relevant portion is extracted below;
“41. Thus, a government servant who may have been
appointed before the cut-off date of 31.03.2003 may
be entitled to government pension if he satisfies the
requirement of qualifying service in Rule 3(o) of the
Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978. However, such a
person will not be entitled to add half of the past
service held in any one of the four capacity mentioned
above prior to 01.04.2003 since his regularisation is
subsequent to the cut off date. Therefore, only those
who were appointed prior to 01.04.2003 whether as
temporary appointment but in accordance with Rule
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
10 (a) (i) alone will be entitled to get pension.
46......(iii) In case, a government employee/servant
had also rendered service in non-provincialised
service, or on consolidated pay or on honorarium or
daily wage basis and if such services were regularised
before 01.04.2003, half of such 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 before
01.04.2003 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."
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
5. A perusal of records reveal that the petitioner was originally
appointed on temporary basis in the year 1989 and his probation was
declared only on 08.06.2009. In view of Clause (v) Paragraph 46 of
the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court, the writ
petitioner's service cannot be counted for the purpose of determining
the qualifying service for pension and therefore he is not entitled for
the same.
6. In the result, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No Costs.
12.11.2021
Index: Yes / No
Internet: Yes
ak
To
1. The Deputy Secretary,
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission,
Anna Salai, Chennai.
2.The Commissioner of Labour,
Teynampet,
Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
ak
W.P.No. 1391 of 2012
12.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
