V.Mookan vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu
2022 Latest Caselaw 8664 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 8664 Mad
Judgement Date : 25 April, 2022

Madras High Court

V.Mookan vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 25 April, 2022

                                                                             W.P.(MD) No.4712 of 2020



                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                 DATED : 25.04.2022

                                                         CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                              W.P.(MD) No.4712 of 2020

                     V.Mookan                                         ... Petitioner

                                                          -vs-


                     1. The Government of Tamil Nadu,
                     Rep., by its Secretary to Government,
                     Environment and Forest Department,
                     Secretariat, Chennai.

                     2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,
                     Chennai.

                     3. The District Forest Officer,
                     Theni District.

                     4. The Divisional Forest Officer,
                     Interforce Forestry Division,
                     Kambam Divisional Range,
                     Kambam, Theni District.

                     5. The Accountant General of Tamil Nadu,
                     Office of the Accountant General,
                     Teynampet, Chennai.                              ... Respondents

                     _________
                     Page 1 of 6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                               W.P.(MD) No.4712 of 2020




                     Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
                     for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take into
                     account 50% of services of the petitioner on daily wages basis from
                     01.04.1981 to 19.10.2003 along with his regular service in the super
                     numerary post of Forest watcher from 20.10.2003 to 30.9.2011 to arrive at
                     the total qualifying service for pension and to grand pensionary benefits to
                     the petitioner.

                                   For Petitioner     :        Mr.T.Bala Rabish
                                                               for M/s.Polax Legal Solutions

                                   For RR1 to 4       :        Mr.M.Ramesh
                                                               Government Advocate

                                                          ******

                                                          ORDER

The petitioner was appointed as Plot Watcher in Kamuthi on

01.04.1981 on daily wage basis temporarily. His services were regularised

with effect from 20.10.2003.

2. The claim of the petitioner is that the daily wage temporary

services from 1981 to 2003 is to be taken into consideration under Rule

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.4712 of 2020

11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. The petitioner seeks 50% of the

counting of the temporary services for the purpose of calculating the

qualifying service.

3. The issue raised by the petitioner is no more res integra, as the

Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu Vs.

R.Kaliyamoorthy reported in 2019 (6) CTC 705 settled the principles on

03.12.2019 and the relevant paragraph is as under:-

“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 W.A.No.

158 of 2016 etc., batch proviso to Rule 2 of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 inserted by G.O.Ms.No.259 dated 06.08.2003

(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

_________

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.4712 of 2020

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 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 W.A.No. 158 of 2016 etc., batch 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.(MD) No.4712 of 2020

4. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench cited supra,

the case of the petitioner is to be considered with reference to his service

records and eligibility as per the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. The petitioner

in this regard is at liberty to produce all the service particulars enabling the

respondents to consider the same in accordance with the judgment of the

Hon'ble Full Bench.

5. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

No costs.

25.04.2022 Internet:Yes Index:Yes

abr