Madras High Court
Sudalai Madathi vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 22 April, 2025
W.P.(MD)No.9298 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.04.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.P.(MD)No.9298 of 2019
Sudalai Madathi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep by its Secretary,
Department of School Education,
Fort.St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director of School Education,
DPI Complex, College Road,
Chennai-6.
3.The District Educational Officer,
Office of the District Educational Office,
Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records
pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.029398/R1/E2/2018 dated
11.01.2019 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same as
illegal and consequently for a direction to the respondents to calculate
half of the temporary service rendered by the petitioner for pension
benefits and provide all other consequential benefits as per G.O.Ms.No.
408, Finance (Pension)Department, dated 25.08.2009 and Rule 11(2) of
the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules within the time period stipulated by this
Court.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
W.P.(MD)No.9298 of 2019
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajasekar,
for M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy and Associates
For Respondents : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh,
Additional Government Pleader.
ORDER
Under assail is the order dated 11.01.2019 issued by the second
respondent and consequently to direct the respondents to calculate half of
the temporary service rendered by the petitioner for pension benefits.
2.The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed temporarily
in the post of Sweeper at Avvaiyar Government Girls Higher Secondary
School, Pavoorchatram, Tenkasi Taluk, Tirunelveli District, as per
proceedings dated 22.11.1977. She was not regularized upto the year
2006. She approached this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.
(MD)No.11639 of 2006 and based on the order passed by this Court
dated 02.03.2007, she was regularized in the post of Sweeper vide
proceedings dated 24.03.2008. The Government has issued an order in
G.O.Ms.No.408 dated 25.08.2009, in which, it has been categorically
provided that half of the temporary service should be reckoned for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
calculation of pension benefits of those regularized employees. She is
entitled to the benefit of calculation of half of the temporary service
rendered by her from 22.11.1977 to 24.03.2008 for the purpose of
calculation of pension. The Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD)
No.547 of 2012 dated 24.08.2017 has held that “the writ petitioner had
worked as an NMR Pump Operator cum Watchman during the entire
period and entitled to take 50% of the said period for computing
pensionary benefits”. The said judgment is squarely applicable to the
case of the petitioner and she is entitled to the benefit of calculation of
half of the temporary service rendered from 22.11.1977 to 24.03.2008 for
the purpose of calculating pension. Hence, this writ petition.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that as per G.O.Ms.No.408 dated 25.08.2009, the petitioner is entitled to
reckoned half of the temporary service and Tamil Nadu Pension Rules
11(2) also provides for inclusion of half of the temporary service
rendered prior to regularization. To strengthen his contention, he has
relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in
W.A.(MD)No.547 of 2012 dated 24.08.2017.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
4.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner was
working as part time employee from 22.11.1977 to 23.03.2008. Part time
service is not equal to the service of NMR, as NMR service is full time
service, the petitioner cannot claim parity with it. He would submit that
the petitioner was absorbed in regular service after 01.04.2003.
Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to calculate 50% of the service
rendered from 22.11.1977 to 22.03.2008. The Hon'ble Division Bench in
W.A.(MD)No.547 of 2012 dated 24.08.2017 considered the case of
NMR employees, whereas, the petitioner is served as part time employee
and part time service of the employee is not par with NMR employees.
Therefore, the order issued in the above writ appeal cannot be made
applicable to the petitioner.
5.This Court has considered the submissions made on either side
and perused the available records.
6.It is not in dispute that the petitioner was initially appointed as
part time Sweeper on 22.11.1977. It is pertinent to mention that the
petitioner was appointed as part time employee on consolidated pay and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
not as full time employee. Thereafter, the petitioner was brought regular
establishment on time scale of pay with effect from 24.03.2008. The
petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 29.02.2012 after
rendering a regular service of four years. The petitioner had submitted a
representation to take 50% of the part time service to sanction pensionary
benefits and filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.15334 of 2018 dated
16.07.2018. This Court directed the respondents to consider the
representation of the petitioner. In compliance of the order of this Court,
the second respondent, in terms of rules, rejected the by explaining the
reasons, vide order dated 11.01.2019.
7.The petitioner has relied mainly on the orders in W.A.(MD)No.
547 of 2012 dated 24.08.2017 and G.O.Ms.No.408, dated 25.08.2009.
The Division Bench of this Court has ordered with regard to the NMR
employees. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner has served as
part time employee and the part time service employee is not on par with
NMR employees. As far as G.O.Ms.No.408 is concerned, it is applicable
to the employees who rendered service under the State Government in
non-provincialised service, consolidated pay, honorarium or daily wages
basis on or after 1st January 1961 and absorbed in regular service before
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
1st April 2003. Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules says that
such employees is not entitled to get benefit of counting half of the
service rendered in daily wages basis along with regular service.
8.At this juncture, it is relevant to refer Rules 1 & 2 of the Tamil
Nadu Pension Rules, which reads as follows:-
1.Short title and commencement - (1) These rules may be
called the Tamil Nadu pension Rules, 1978.
(2) they shall be deemed to have come into force on
the 1st January 1979.
"Provided that these rules shall not apply to
Government Servants appointed on or after the 1st April
2003, to services and posts in connection with the affairs of
the State which are borne on pensionable establishments,
whether temporary or permanent."
2. Application Save as otherwise provided in these
rules, these rules shall apply to all Government Servants
appointed to services and posts in connection with the
affairs of the State which are borne on pensionable
establishments whether temporary or permanent, but shall
not apply to -
(a) persons in casual and daily rated employment;
(b) persons paid from contingencies;
(c) persons employed on contract except when the
contract provides otherwise;
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
(d) members of the All-India Services;
(e) persons entitled to the benefit of a Contributory
Provident Fund;
(f)persons who are entitled to the benefits under the
Factories Act, 1948 and the Employees' Provident Fund
Act, 1952, excluding those who are governed by Statutory
Service Rules and belong to pensionable service.
9.A reading of Rule 11(4) shows that half of service rendered
under the State Government in non-provincialised service, consolidated
pay, honorarium or daily wages basis on or after 1st January 1961 in
respect of Government employees absorbed in regular service before 1st
April 2003 shall be counted for retirement benefits along with regular
service, subject to the following three conditions:-
(i) Service rendered in non-provincialised service, consolidated
pay, honorarium or daily wages basis shall be in a job involving whole
time employment;
(ii) Service rendered shall be on consolidated pay, honorarium or
daily wages paid on monthly basis and subsequently absorbed in regular
service under the State Government.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
(iii) Service rendered in non-provincialised service, consolidated
pay, honorarium or daily wages basis shall be followed by absorption in
regular service before 1st April 2003 without a break.
10.In this case, the petitioner was absorbed in regular service after
01.04.2003 and Tamil Nadu Pension Rules is not applicable to the
petitioner. There is no merits in this writ petition and the same is liable
to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
NCC : Yes / No 22.04.2025
Index : Yes / No
gns
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
To
1.The Secretary,
Department of School Education,
Fort.St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director of School Education,
DPI Complex, College Road,
Chennai-6.
3.The District Educational Officer,
Office of the District Educational Office,
Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
gns
22.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/05/2025 05:49:36 pm )
