Madras High Court
S.Joseph Jeyasingh vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 4 October, 2021
W.P.No.25922 of 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P. No.25922 of 2009 and
MP.Nos.2 and 3 of 2009 and
WMP.No.19424 of 2016 and
WMP.No.11259 of 2019
1.S.Joseph Jeyasingh
2.K.Balamurali
3.J.Muthukumaran
4.S.Dhanasekaran
5.K.Ramesh
6.C.Palani
7.S.Sankar
8.S.Nesamani
9.K.Kamalakannan
10.S.Meena
11.P.Subramanian
12.J.Gangadaran
13.V.Vijayalakshmi
14.C.Sutha
15.K.Karuppusamy
16.B.Priya
17.N.Mohanraj
18.N.Shanthidevi
19.R.Padmavathi
20.E.Srinivasan
21.B.Anandhaboopathy
22.D.Jayaprakash
23.L.Narayanasamy
24.S.Sethuramalingam … Petitioners
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.25922 of 2009
Vs
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Department of School Education,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai.
3.The Educational Officer,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai. … Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records pertaining to the order passed by 3rd Respondent order dated
03.11.2009 having reference No.Ka.Thu.Na.Ka.No.E3/E9/5142/09 and quash
the same in so far as it relates to the inclusion of the names of the Petitioners in
the list of the Teachers to be brought under the Contributory Pension Scheme
and consequently direct the 3rd Respondent to retain the names of the
Petitioners in the existing General Provident Fund and Pension Scheme.
For Petitioners : Mrs.Nalini Chidambaram, Senior Counsel
for M/s.C.Uma
For Respondents : Mr.C.Selvaraj (for R1)
Government Advocate
Mr.R.Gopinath (for R2 & R3)
2/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.25922 of 2009
ORDER
The 17th petitioner in this writ petition, has, vide WMP.No.11259 of
2019, prayed that he be permitted to withdraw this writ petition. Acceding to
the prayer, WMP.No.11259 of 2019 is ordered and WP.No.25922 of 2009 is
closed as withdrawn as against the 17th petitioner alone. As far as the other writ
petitioners are concerned, it is the common prayer of all the petitioners that
they were appointed as Teachers in a Corporation School.
2.They had appeared for the qualifying examination for appointment as
B.T.Assistants and Tamil Pandits in various schools administered by the
Corporation of Chennai on 21.04.2002. All the petitioners were successful in
the examinations and had been appointed to the posts to which they sought
appointment on 09.06.2003.
3.Pending issue of orders of appointment, there was a change in policy
of the Government of Tamilnadu and B.T. Assistants and Tamil Pandits, who
had been selected in the recruitment examination were brought under the
Contributory Pension Scheme (CPS). It is the petitioners say that seeing as they
had been successful in the examinations, their appointments ought not to have
been delayed till June 2003.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.25922 of 2009
4. The CPS which was issued under G.O.No.259 of 2003, contains
various stipulations that, according to the petitioner are prejudicial to the
interest of the petitioners. The present writ petition challenges order dated
03.11.2009, which relates to the inclusion of the names of the petitioners in the
list of Teachers to be brought under the CPS. They seek a consequential
direction to R3, who is the Educational Officer, Corporation of Chennai to
retain the names of the petitioners in the existing General Provident Fund and
Pension Scheme and not bring them under the CPS.
5. In the counter filed by R2, the Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai,
the ground taken is that G.O.No.259 of 2003 had not been challenged by the
petitioners. It is as per the G.O. that the names of the petitioners were sought to
be shifted to the CPS scheme and since was not challenged, the petitioner's
case has no merit. The date of the G.O. is 06.08.2003 and the petitioners would
argue that by applying the said G.O. to their appointments dated 09.06.2003,
the G.O. has in fact, been given retrospective effect, which is impermissible.
6. This ground finds place batch of writ petitions filed recently bearing
Nos.9027 and 9035 of 2019 wherein the petitioners challenge G.O.No.259 of
2003. The batch has come to be dismissed on 10.06.2019 and SLP have been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.25922 of 2009
filed bearing Nos.17631 and 17632 of 2019 in which notice has been issued to
the State.
7. In light of the narration as aforesaid, the course of action that appeals
to me is to close the present writ petition, as its fate will be determined by the
result of the Special Leave Petitions pending before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court.
8. Hence, this writ petition is closed, granting liberty to the petitioners to
revive the matter in the light of and subject to the judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the pending SLPs. No costs. Connected miscellaneous
petitions are also closed.
04.10.2021
Index : Yes
Speaking Order
vs
To
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Department of School Education,
Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.25922 of 2009
Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.
vs
2.The Commissioner,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai.
3.The Educational Officer,
Corporation of Chennai,
Rippon Building,
Chennai.
W.P. No.25922 of 2009 and
MP.Nos.2 and 3 of 2009 and
WMP.No.19424 of 2016 and
WMP.No.11259 of 2019
04.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
