Madras High Court
J.Sundaram vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 29 March, 2023
W.A.No.2413 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.03.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
Writ Appeal No.2413 of 2022
J.Sundaram .. Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Secretariat, Fort.St.George,
Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
3. The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel),
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
4. The Chief Educational Officer,
Vellore District, Vellore.
5. The Principal Accountant General (A&E)
Tamil Nadu,
No.361, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 018. .. Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.A.No.2413 of 2022
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent praying to set aside
the order dated 20.09.2022 made in WP.No.27333 of 2017.
For Appellant : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran
For R1 to R4 : Mr.G.Nanmaran
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. MAHADEVAN, J.)
The writ petitioner has preferred this intra-court appeal, as against the
order dated 20.09.2022 passed by the learned Judge in WP No.27333 of 2017.
2.According to the appellant, he was appointed as Copyist in Judicial
Ministerial Service through Employment Exchange on 25.11.1998 and posted
in Sub Court, Thirupattur, Vellore District. He was ousted from service on
16.08.2000, as persons in Typist Category were reverted to the post of
Copyist. However, based on the order dated 26.06.2001 in WP.No.7754 of
2001, he was given a posting order, to join as Copyist in Sub Court,
Thirupattur, on 18.09.2001, vide order of the Principal District Judge, Vellore,
dated 13.09.2001. His service was regularised in the permanent vacancy, with
effect from 18.09.2001. While so, he was called for certificate verification
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2413 of 2022
through employment exchange, for the post of B.T.Assistant (Science) in
Education Department, vide the proceedings dated 16.06.2007. After getting
due permission from the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Ambur, the
appellant participated in the certificate verification and was selected to the
post of B.T.Assistant (Science) and awaiting the order of Appointment. Hence,
he submitted a representation on 25.06.2007 to the Principal District Judge,
requesting to relieve him from the post of copyist, in order to take up the
employment as BT Assistant (Science) as and when posting order is issued by
the Education Department. But the said request was not considered, which
compelled the appellant to submit a letter on 16.07.2007 to resign his post of
copyist and take up the post of B.T Assistant. Based on his resignation, he was
relieved from service with effect from 31.07.2007, but due to administrative
delay, he joined the post of B.T. Assistant only on 08.10.2007; and in that
process, there was a break in service for 68 days, due to which, he was not
placed under the old pension scheme. Therefore, the appellant made a
representation to the third respondent through proper channel, requesting to
condone the break in service. By order dated 29.05.2014, the said
representation was rejected by the third respondent on the ground that the
resigned employees cannot be placed in the old pension scheme and that, the
break in service cannot be condoned if the employee was not properly relieved
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2413 of 2022
from his past service. Challenging the said rejection order, the appellant
preferred an appeal before the first respondent on 29.04.2013 and on
27.10.2014. Finding no response on the same, he filed WP.No.27333 of 2017.
By order dated 20.09.2022, the learned Judge, instead of directing the first
respondent to dispose of the said appeal, dismissed the writ petition, by
holding that as per Rule 23 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, a resigned
employee forfeits his past service and cannot be placed under old pension
scheme. Therefore, this intra-court appeal by the appellant / writ petitioner.
3.When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned Special
Government Pleader appearing for the respondent authorities, on instructions,
submitted that the appeal filed by the appellant, has already been rejected by
the first respondent and hence, nothing survives for adjudication in this writ
appeal.
4.In reply, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
rejection order has not been furnished to the appellant and hence, the same
may be directed to be served on him. The learned counsel further submitted
that the appellant may be granted liberty to challenge the same in the manner
known to law.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2413 of 2022
5.In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel on either
side, this court directs the respondent authorities to serve a copy of the order
passed in the appeal filed by the appellant, if not served earlier, within a period
of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of
the same, it is open to the appellant to challenge the same, as per law, if so
advised.
6.Accordingly, this writ appeal stands disposed of. No costs.
[R.M.D., J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
29.03.2023
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
av
To
1. The Principal Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Secretariat, Fort.St.George,
Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
3. The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel),
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2413 of 2022
R. MAHADEVAN, J
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J
av
4. The Chief Educational Officer,
Vellore District, Vellore.
5. The Principal Accountant General (A&E)
Tamil Nadu,
No.361, Anna Salai,
Chennai - 600 018.
Writ Appeal No.2413 of 2022
29.03.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
