Madras High Court
M.Marimuthu vs The Secretary To Government on 19 September, 2022
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 19.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
M.Marimuthu ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The Secretary to Government,
Municipal Administration and Water
Supply Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner,
Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
Ezhilagam, Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Commissioner,
Municipal Corporation of Thiruchirappalli,
Thiruchirappalli.
4.The Assistant Commissioner,
Ariyamangalam Division,
Municipal Corporation of Thiruchirappalli,
Thiruchirappalli. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to compute the entire
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
period of service from 21.09.1983 to 28.12.2015 (22 years and 11 months),
rendered by the petitioner on temporary basis for the purpose of counting as
qualified service for the computation of pension and future retirement benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Sekar
for M/s.S.Arunachalam Associates
For R3 and R4 : Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan
*****
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for issuance of a writ of Mandamus, to direct the
respondents to compute the entire period of service from 21.09.1983 to
28.12.2015 (22 years and 11 months), rendered by the petitioner on temporary
basis for the purpose of counting as qualified service for the computation of
pension and future retirement benefits.
2.The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as
Overhead Tank Television and Street light Operator on 21.09.1983 under the
control of Commissioner Panchayat Union, Thiruverumbur. Subsequently, the
petitioner's service was regularized on 01.09.2006 in the post of Electrician
Helper in the time scale of pay of Rs.2550-55-2660-60-3200.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
3.The contention of the petitioner is that he was continuously in service
without any break and he has continuously worked in the 4th respondent
municipal service and has attained superannuation on completion of 60 years
from 28.02.2015. The petitioner was permitted to retire from service and was
relieved as per the proceedings of the 3rd respondent, dated 27.02.2015. However
the petitioner was not paid any retirement benefits, but the respondent paid only a
sum of Rs.45,000/- equivalent to encashment of earned leave and savings and
thrift Societies amount of Rs.39,000/- and Rs.10,000/- of other deposits. The
further contention of the petitioner is that initially he joined as unskilled daily
wage worker without routing through employment exchange. However, the
petitioner was otherwise qualified. The nature of work is perennial and it is a full
time job as done by the permanent workers. The petitioner was regularized as per
the G.O.No.21, Municipal Administration Department, dated 23.02.2006. Even
as per the order, the petitioner was entitled to be regularized from the date of
issuance of the order, i.e., 23.02.2006. The respondents have not taken the
original date of appointment, i.e., 21.09.1983. Therefore, the petitioner has come
up with this writ petition claiming to add the temporary service and grant pension.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
4. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was not recruited through
employment exchange and he had joined the service in a temporary post as a daily
wage employee on 21.09.1983. Thereafter, the petitioner was regularized as per
G.O.No.21, Municipal Administration Department, dated 23.02.2006 and the
regularization is from 23.02.2006 onwards. The issue of adding fifty percent of
the temporary service was considered by the Honourable Full Bench in the case
of the Government of Tamil Nadu and others Vs R. Kaliyamoorthy reported in
2019 (6) CTC 705 case, wherein it has been stated that if any person is employed
as a daily wage employee and regularized after 2003, then the employee is not
entitled to add the temporary service. The relevant portion of the order is
extracted hereunder:
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 entitled to get
pension as per the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
(iii) In case, a government employee/servant had also rendered service in
non-provincialized 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."
5. In the light of the judgment rendered in the Hon’ble Full Bench, under
clause (v) the petitioner is not eligible for any pension. Therefore, this Court is of
the considered opinion that the claim of the petitioner is not as per the law.
Hence, the Mandamus cannot be granted and the writ petition is dismissed. No
costs.
Index : Yes / No 19.09.2022
Internet : Yes
Tmg
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
S.SRIMATHY, J
Tmg
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.
W.P.(MD)No.8662 of 2016
19.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
