Madras High Court
S.Sumathi vs The Principal Secretary To Government on 29 October, 2024
Author: N. Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 29.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.32304 of 2024
S.Sumathi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Handloom, Handicraft, Textile & Khadi (G2) Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat, Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director,
Department of Sericulture,
Nethaji Nagar,
Hasthampatti, Salem – 7,
Salem District.
3.The Assistant Director,
Department of Sericulture,
Dharmapuri,
Dharmapuri District.
4.The Accountant General of Tamil Nadu,
Office of the Accountant General,
Anna Salai,
Teynampet,
Chennai – 18. ... Respondents
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing Respondents 1 to 3 to regularize the
service of petitioner as Junior Inspector from the date on which similarly placed
employee viz, Chitra and Shanthi who were appointed as Junior Inspector on
31.08.1996 for the purpose of getting pension in the light of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court Judgment reported in (2019) 10 SCC 516 and confer all consequential
pensionary benefits from the date of her retirement by sending the proposal to the
4th respondent for granting pension with all consequential monetary benefits.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.R.Jothimanian
For Respondents : Mr.P.Balathandayutham
Special Government Pleader
for R1 to R3
Mrs.J.Sreevidya
Standing Counsel for R4
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for issue of writ of mandamus directing the
respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as Junior Inspector from the
date on which similarly placed employees were appointed as Junior Inspectors for
the purpose of getting pension and for all other consequential benefits from the date
of retirement.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2.Heard Mr.M.R.Jothimanian, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, Mr.P.Balathandayutham, learned Special Government Pleader appearing
on behalf of respondents 1 to 3 and Mrs.J.Sreevidya, learned Standing Counsel
appearing on behalf of the 4th respondent.
3.The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as an Extension
Worker in the year 1984. Thereafter, she was promoted as a Supervisor in the year
1988 by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner got her further promotion as a Junior
Inspector in the year 2012 and thereafter, got the promotion as Assistant Inspector
of Sericulture through proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 31.05.2024. The
petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 30.06.2024 and retired from
service.
4.The grievance of the petitioner is that she did not get any pensionary
benefits and that her promotion to the post of Assistant Inspector of Sericulture was
denied by the 2nd respondent initially. The petitioner approached this Court and
filed W.P.No.28811 of 2018. The writ petition was allowed by an order dated
31.10.2023 and only pursuant to that order, the petitioner was promoted as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Assistant Inspector of Sericulture w.e.f. 31.05.2024. According to the petitioner, the
similarly placed employees who were appointed along with the petitioner in the
year 1984 have been extended the benefit of pension. The petitioner wanted the
same benefit to be extended in her favour also. The petitioner did not get the
pension benefits even though she rendered services for nearly 40 years because the
regularization had taken place only in the year 2003. The petitioner has come up
with a case that the other similarly placed employees appointed along with the
petitioner were regularized before 01.04.2003 and therefore, they got the pension
benefits. According to the petitioner, the delay in regularization of her services
cannot deprive her of the right to be given pension on par with those employees
who joined along with the petitioner. The representation given by the petitioner in
this regard did not evoke any response. It is under these circumstances, the present
writ petition came to be filed before before this Court.
5.Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and also
the nature of grievance expressed by the petitioner and a similar order that was
passed by this Court in a batch of cases in W.P.No.19406 of 2023 etc., dated
07.08.2023 and the order passed in O.A.No.7164 of 1996, dated 12.12.1996, there
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to deal with the representation made by
the petitioner on 02.08.2024 and take a decision, within a period of eight weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
6.The petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation to the 2 nd
respondent along with all the relevant documents and also a copy of this order.
7.This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No Costs.
29.10.2024
Internet : Yes
Index : Yes
Speaking Order / Non Speaking Order
ssr
To
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Handloom, Handicraft, Textile & Khadi (G2) Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat, Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
ssr
2.The Director,
Department of Sericulture,
Nethaji Nagar,
Hasthampatti, Salem – 7,
Salem District.
3.The Assistant Director,
Department of Sericulture,
Dharmapuri,
Dharmapuri District.
4.The Accountant General of Tamil Nadu,
Office of the Accountant General,
Anna Salai,
Teynampet,
Chennai – 18
29.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
