Madras High Court
P.Sekar vs The Principal Secretary To on 25 November, 2021
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.11.2021
CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P(MD) No.5661 of 2020
P.Sekar Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Principal Secretary to
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rural Development and Panchayat Raj,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director,
Directorate of Rural Development,
and Panchayat Raj Department,
Panagal Building,
Saidapet,
Chennai – 600 015.
3.The Principal Accountant General,
(Accounts and Entitlement),
No.361, Annasalai,
Tenampettai,
Chennai – 600 018.
4.The District Collector,
Trichy.
5.The Block Development Officer (Block),
Thathayangarpettai Panchayat Union,
Musiri Taluk,Trichy. Respondents
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, thereby call for the
records of the third respondent in No.PO3/04/ 10316767/ADK dated
18.05.2016 and quash the same as arbitrary and illegal and in
consequences thereof direct the respondents to take into account 50% of
the service rendered by the petitioner as Panchayat Assistant from
02.05.1984 to 01.07.2012 and grant pension with arrears with 12% from
interest till the disbursement of the same.
For Petitioner :Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramaniyan
For R1,R2, R4 & R5 :Mr.Shaji Bino
Special Government Pleader
For R3 :Mr.P.Gunasekaran
ORDER
This writ petition is filed as against the order passed by the
third respondent in No.PO3/04/ 10316767/ADK dated 18.05.2016 and
consequential direction, directing the respondents to take 50% of the
service rendered by the petitioner from 02.05.1984 to 01.07.2012 and to
grant pension arrears with 12% interest.
2.The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as
Panchayat Clerk at Sevathalingapuram Village Panchayat, Musiri Union,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
Trichy on 02.05.1984 by Special officer on monthly salary of Rs.52.50/-.
Subsequently, he was posted as Panchayat Assistant on 01.01.1991 on
consolidated pay of Rs.400. On 05.12.2006, time scale of pay was fixed
as Rs.625/-. Thereafter, he hold the posts of Panchayat Secretary, Junior
Assistant and Panchayat Assistant. On 31.12.2015, he retired from
service on superannuation. According to the petitioner, as per G.O.No.39
and 408, 50% of service rendered as Panchayat Clerk and Assistant is to
be taken into account for calculating the pension benefits and the same
was upheld by this Court in W.P.No.14770 of 2012. According to the
petitioner, G.O.No.228 and 8 have been passed for grant of relief
considering 50% of service for calculating the pensionary benefits.
Subsequently, the fifth respondent in concurrence with the respondents 2
& 4 sent pension proposal to the third respondent and the same was
returned on the ground that the petitioner's service was regularized only
on 01.09.2006 and he is entitled only for contributory pension scheme.
According to the petitioner, his service was regularized on 01.04.2003,
he is entitled to get benefits of old pension scheme. Hence, challenging
the order passed by the third respondent, he is before this Court with the
present writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
3.Mr.Shaji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents 1,2,4 & 5 submits that the petitioner was
appointed as Panchayat Clerk on 02.05.1984 and his service was
regularized only on 05.12.2006 and therefore, this petitioner is not
entitled for calculating 50% of his service rendered by him from 1984 to
2006.
4.Further, the Special Government Pleader claims that the
issue in this writ petition is now settled by the judgment of this Court in
W.A.No.158 of 2016 etc., batch, dated 03.12.2019, wherein, the
Honourable Division Bench has answered this issue as follows:-
45.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 Tamil Nadu Pension
Rules, 1978 inserted by G.O.Ms.No.259, dated
06.08.2003.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
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, or on consolidated pay or on
honorarium or daily wage basis, and if such
services were regularized 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
Services 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
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. According to the learned Special Government Pleader,
this petitioner is not entitled for the relief as per paragraph 45 of the
orders passed by the Full Bench of this Court.
6.Though the learned counsel for the petitioner claims that
this petitioner has been regularized even prior to 2006, in order to
substantiate his contention, no relevant documents have been placed
before this Court. This Court feels that the petitioner's case is covered by
the judgment of Full Bench of this Court passed in W.A.No.158 of 2016
etc., Batch, dated 03.12.2019.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
7.In such view of the matter, this Writ Petition is dismissed.
No costs.
25.11.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vrn
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.
To
1.The Principal Secretary,
Rural Development and Panchayat Raj,
Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director,
Directorate of Rural Development,
and Panchayat Raj Department,
Panagal Building,
Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
3.The Principal Accountant General,
(Accounts and Entitlement),
No.361, Annasalai,
Tenampettai, Chennai – 600 018.
4.The District Collector,
Trichy.
5.The Block Development Officer (Block),
Thathayangarpettai Panchayat Union,
Musiri Taluk,Trichy.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.5661 of 2020
B.PUGALENDHI, J
vrn
Order made in
W.P(MD) No.5661 of 2020
25.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
