Madras High Court
The Secretary To Government vs A.Nagalingam on 5 October, 2023
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 05.10.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
and
C.M.P.(MD).No.423 of 2019
1.The Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George,
Chennai.
2.The Commissioner,
Revenue Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai.
3.The District Collector,
Collectorate Building,
Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District. .. Appellants/Respondents
Vs.
1.A.Nagalingam
2.N.Krishna Ramanujam
3.S.Balakrishnan
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
4.Sri Renganathan
5.A.Seeniammal
(R-5 is substituted for the deceased second respondent vide Court order
dated 13.04.2016 in M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2015)
6.Pandithai ..Respondents/Petitioners
(R-6 is substituted for the deceased fourth respondent vide Court order
dated 13.04.2016 in M.P.(MD).No.2 of 2015)
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside
the order dated 21.12.2017 made in W.P.(MD).No.13204 of 2014 on the file
of this Court and allow this Writ Appeal.
For Appellants : Mr.N.Sathish Kumar
Additional Government Pleader
For R-3, R-5 & R-6: M/s.P.Malini
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.)
The Writ Appeal on hand has been instituted challenging the order
dated 21.12.2017 passed in W.P.(MD).No.13204 of 2014.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
2. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of
the appellants mainly contended that the respondents 1 to 4 were initially
appointed as Village Karnam and the post of Village Karnam was abolished
by the Government. The eligible erstwhile Village Karnams were
re-appointed as Village Administrative Officers and they retired from
service. In respect of pension and pensionary benefits, the Government
issued orders relaxing the relevant Pension Rules and extended the benefits.
The benefit of family pension was also subsequently extended to the
spouses of the deceased employees.
3. In the present case, the writ petitioners had admittedly served as
Village Karnams and after abolition of the post, they were re-appointed as
Village Administrative Officers. The Writ Petition was filed seeking
pension from the date of retirement. The Government Order issued
restricting the pensionary benefits of the erstwhile Village Karnams, was
under challenge in the writ proceedings. The learned Single Judge
considered the issues in favour of the writ petitioners and directed the
authorities to sanction revised pension to the writ petitioners as retired
Village Administrative Officers from their respective date of retirement.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
4. The erstwhile Village Karnams on their re-appointment as Village
Administrative Officers, who had not completed minimum qualifying
service of ten years under the Pension Rules, were also extended the benefit
of pension by relaxing the relevant Pension Rules. That being a concession
extended by the Government in favour of the erstwhile Village Karnams,
who were re-appointed as Village Administrative Officers, the Court cannot
confer or extend further concession in the matter of grant of pensionary
benefits. The Pension Rules applicable itself was relaxed. Further
relaxation of rules are impermissible and the power of judicial review
cannot be extended for the purpose of relaxation of Pension Rules, which
would result in opening of pandora's box.
5. That apart, the issues raised in the present Writ Petition are no more
res integra and the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, in a batch of Writ
Appeals, elaborately considered the scope of the Government Order and the
eligibility of the erstwhile Village Karnams on their re-appointment as
Village Administrative Officers and for availing the benefit of pension and
pensionary benefits. The judgment was delivered on 26.02.2021 in W.A.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
(MD).Nos.1629 of 2018 etc., batch and the relevant portion of the judgment
reads as follows:
“18.We have already took note of the relevant Rules. A
perusal of the Tamil Nadu Village Servants Conduct Rules,
1983, clearly states the status and position of Writ Petitioners.
Certainly, they come under the definition 'Village Assistants'.
However, Rule 3, which facilitate a Village Servant to take job
of part-time work or occupation, makes it abundantly clear
that he is only a parttime Government Servant. Similarly, Rule
14 of Tamil Nadu Village Servants Service Rules, 1980, which
gives a succour to a part-time Government servant, as that of
the respondents, gives a specific compensation. A conjoint
reading of the aforesaid Rules would show that a Village
Servant/Assistant was having a part- time service alone.
...26.Having considered the entire issues involved, we
also find that there is no application of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India by comparing the respondents with those
who got the relief albeit without taking note of the relevant
provisions of law. Granting the relief would amount to setting
aside two pension Rules without even a challenge especially
when the respondents got the benefit of regular employment
and permanent posts under the subsequent orders passed, on
their request.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
27.In the result, the appeals filed by the Government of
Tamil Nadu stand allowed by setting aside the orders passed
by the learned Single Judge and consequently, the appeal filed
by the Writ Petitioner in W.A.(MD) No.831 of 2020 stands
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petitions are closed.”
6. The order under challenge before us is running counter to the
principles settled by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment cited
supra. Thus, we are inclined to consider the Writ Appeal. Accordingly, the
order dated 21.12.2017 passed in W.P.(MD).No.13204 of 2014 is set aside
and the Writ Appeal stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
(S.M.S.,J.) (V.L.N.,J.)
05.10.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Lm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George,
Chennai.
2.The Commissioner,
Revenue Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai.
3.The District Collector,
Collectorate Building,
Virudhunagar,
Virudhunagar District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.
and
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.
Lm
W.A.(MD).No.72 of 2019
05.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
