Madras High Court
M.Sekar vs Registrar General on 4 April, 2022
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04.04.2022
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI,
CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.24985 of 2021
M.Sekar .. Petitioner
vs
1.Registrar General
Madras High Court
Chennai 600 104.
2.The Accountant General Officer
Accounts and Entitlements
Mount Road, Teynampet
Chennai 600 018.
3.State of Tamil Nadu
Represented by its Additional
Chief Secretary to Government
Home (Courts) Department
Secretariat, Tamil Nadu
Chennai 600 009.
___________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
4.State of Tamil Nadu
Represented through its Additional
Chief Secretary Finance Department
Court, Secretariat, Tamil Nadu
Chennai 600 009. ... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India
praying for Writ of Mandamus to grant pension and other retirement
benefits of the petitioner herein with interest at the rate of 18
percentage per annum in pursuance of the recommendation of the 1st
respondent to the 3rd respondent by his letter dated 12.05.2021 in
ROC No.22213/ 2019-B -1 who was placed similar to the order of the
Honourable Supreme court of India in Civil Appeal Nos.8216 to 8222 of
2018 dated 25.3.2019 within the time frame fixed by this court.
For Petitioner : R.T.Shyamala
For Respondents : Mr.B.Vijay
Standing Counsel
For R1
No appearance for R2
Mrs.R.Anitha
Special Government Pleader
For R3 and R4
___________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by
the Hon'ble Chief Justice)
The writ petition has been filed seeking direction for grant of
pension and other retirement benefits and interest @ 18% p.a.
pursuant to the recommendation of the 1st respondent dated
12.05.2021.
2. It is stated that, now the respondents have issued Pension
Payment Order (“PPO” for brevity), according to which, petitioner
has been made entitled with pension benefit. In view of the above,
so far as the direction for the grant of pension is concerned, it has
been rendered infructuous.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner however prays for
interest on the belated payment of pension on the ground that the
petitioner retired in the year 2018, while the pension has been
sanctioned in the year 2022 and accordingly, for the intervening
period, the petitioner is entitled for interest.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
4. The prayer with regard to the interest has been contested
by the respondents. Learned counsel appearing for the High Court
submits that the petitioner was not entitled to pensionary benefit.
In fact, he was not appointed in service by regular mode and it is
only pursuant to the judgment of the Division Bench that his
services were regularised by way of one time arrangement,
otherwise, the petitioner was not even entitled to regularisation of
service. The issue of pension thereupon came up for consideration
before the Apex Court in the appeals preferred by similarly placed
persons like the petitioner. The Apex Court, taking note of entire
stock of facts and drawing powers under Article 142 of Constitution
of India, carving out an exception, allowed the pensionary benefit to
the appellants therein. Even though the appellants before the
Supreme Court were not entitled for pensionary benefits, as a one
time exception, the pension was allowed, however, the petitioner
herein was not a party to the said proceedings.
5. Based on the judgment of the Supreme Court, certain
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
representation was given by the petitioner for extension of the
benefit of pension. Though strictly speaking the order passed by
the Apex Court drawing powers under Article 142 of the
Constitution of India was not binding, but the Government taking
liberal approach in the matter and giving relaxation to the general
rule regarding eligibility of the pension, decided to award pension to
the petitioner and other similarly placed persons. In view of the
above, there was no delay in grant of pension because, the moment
the decision was made, the PPO was issued, extending pensionary
benefit to the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to
interest as there is no delay in granting the pensionary benefit to
the petitioner.
6. We have considered the rival submissions and find that
while the petitioner has been given the benefit of pension by the
respondents pursuant to the decision taken by the Government
after the judgment of the Apex Court and PPO also has been issued,
the issue with regard to payment of interest does not arise.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
7. Learned counsel for the respondents, giving the brief
history of the litigation, not only regarding the grant of pensionary
benefits, but also the initial litigation regarding regularisation of
service, submits that though the persons similarly placed were not
found entitled to get pensionary benefit, it was the intention of the
Court in the judgment therein to grant relaxation of the rule as an
exception and as a one time arrangement, pension was granted to
the appellants therein, where the petitioner was not even a party.
8. In that case, the Government relaxing the norms and rules
for entitlement of pension, took a decision to extend the benefit to
the petitioner also and the moment the decision was taken, PPO
was issued without any delay. In such circumstances, it cannot be
stated that there was a delay on the part of the respondents to
extend the benefit of pension, rather the case sets out different
facts, where no delay can be attributed to the Government for
extending the benefit of pension and accordingly, finding no ground
to allow interest on the payment of pension, we decline the prayer
as sought for by the petitioner in this regard. However, since
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
pension has been granted, we dispose of this writ petition. There
shall be no order as to costs.
(M.N.B., CJ.) (D.B.C.J.)
04.04.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
KST/MKN
To:
1.The Registrar General
Madras High Court
Chennai 600 104.
2.The Accountant General Officer
Accounts and Entitlements
Mount Road, Teynampet
Chennai 600 018.
3.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government
Home (Courts) Department
Secretariat, Tamil Nadu
Chennai 600 009.
4.The Additional Chief Secretary,
Finance Department Court,
Secretariat, Tamil Nadu.
Chennai 600 009.
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No. 24985 of 2021
M.N.BHANDARI, CJ
AND
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J
KST/MKN
W.P.No.24985 of 2021
04.04.2022
___________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
