Madras High Court
V.Perumal vs The Secretary To Government on 18 February, 2025
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
2025:MHC:465
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 18.02.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE R.POORNIMA
W.A(MD)Nos.1306 of 2011 and 706 of 2010
and
M.P(MD)Nos.1 of 2010 and 3 of 2011
V.Perumal
Formerly Gang Master,
Tenkasi Municipality,
Tenkasi,
Tirunelveli District. ... Appellant/Petitioner
.Vs.
1.The Secretary to Government,
Municipal Administration and Water Supply
(Na.Pa.1)Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai -600 009.
2.The Director of Municipal Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Commissioner,
Tenkasi Municipality,
Tenkasi,
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tirunelveli District.
4.The Director,
Local Fund Audit,
4th Floor,
Kuralagam Complex,
Chennai – 600 105. ... Respondents/Respondents
W.P(MD)No.706 of 2010
1.The Secretary to Government,
Municipal Administration and Water Supply
(Na.Pa.1)Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai -600 009.
2.The Director of Municipal Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Commissioner,
Tenkasi Municipality,
Tenkasi,
Tirunelveli District.
4.The Director,
Local Fund Audit,
4th Floor,
Kuralagam Complex,
Chennai – 600 105. :Appellants/Respondents
/vs/
V.Perumal
Formerly Gang Master,
Tenkasi Municipality,
Tenkasi,
2/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tirunelveli District. :Respondent/Petitioner
PRAYER in W.A(MD)NO.1306 of 2011: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of
Letters Patent Act praying this Court to set aside the order passed by this Court
made in W.P(MD)No.1519 of 2010, dated 24.08.2010 insofar as the denial of
arrears of salary from 31.3.2005 to 31.3.2007 and consequently allow the Writ
Petition in fully prayed for as in Mr.T.Pandaram’s case.
PRAYER in W.A(MD)NO.706 of 2010: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of
Letters Patent Act praying this Court to set aside the order passed by this Court
made in W.P(MD)No.1519 of 2010, dated 24.08.2010.
W.P(MD)No.1306 of 2011
For Appellant : Mr.K.Rajkumar
For R1,R2 & R4 : Mr.D.Gandhiraj
Spl.Govt. Pleader
For R3 : Mr.K.Mahendran
W.P(MD)No.706 of 2010
For Appellants : Mr.D.Gandhiraj
1,2 and 4 Spl.Govt. Pleader
For Appellant No.3 : Mr.K.Mahendran
3/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
For Respondent :Mr.K.Rajkumar
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.)
These Writ Appeals are filed by the Writ Petitioner as well as the State
being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P(MD)No.1519 of
2010, dated 24.08.2010.
2.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the
materials placed before this Court.
3.V.Perumal, who joined as NMR in Tenkasi Municipality, later was
regularized and on attaining the age of 58 years, he was superannuated. However,
the fundamental rules for basic servants envisage that retirement age of basic
servants is 60 years. One Mr.Pandaram, who was employed as Gardener in
Tenkasi Municipality approached this Court by way of Writ Petition in
W.P(MD)No.1771 of 2007 for continuation of service till he attains the age of 60
years and he succeed. Citing the case of Pandaram, Perumal has approached this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Court by filing W.P(MD)No.1519 of 2010.The learned Single Judge, after
considering the relief sought and considring the main difference between the case
of Pandaram and the Writ Appellant-Perumal that the said Pandaram approached
this Court before his superannuation and sought for extension, whereas, the
Perumal has come to this Court after he being relieved from service, thought fit
that he was not entitled for the monetary benefit for 2 years period for which he
has not worked and he must be entitled for pensionary benefits calculating his
service as 60 years or age. Being aggrieved of denial of his pay for the two years
extended period, he has preferred W.A(MD)No.1306 of 2011 and the State being
aggrieved by the direction to calculate his length of service of the Writ Petitioner
as 60 years, has preferred W.A(MD)No.706 of 2010.
4.The point for consideration in these Writ Appeals is as to whether there
can be notional continuation of service for the sake of pensionary benefits or
Writ Appellant Perumal should be treated on par with the case of Pandaram and to
be provided with monetary benefit and also salary for the period for which he
was denied the extension of service?
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5.Before adverting to the above said facts, this Court records the fact that a
common memo filed on behalf of Peruml reporting that he died and his legal
heirs are not interested in pursuing the matter further.
6.Apart from the above said fact that the legal heirs are not interested in
pursuing the matter further and due to the death of Perumal, his Writ Appeal has
got abated, this Court is convinced about the fact that any person who is entitled
for the relief shall seek the remedy within a reasonable time and even to seek
parity, there must be some justification for dealy in resorting to legal remedy.
7.In G.O.Ms.No.202, Municipal Administration and Water Supply
Department, dated 16.10.2008 has sought to be given retrospective effect after
five years of superannuation. If any relief is granted to a person who has
approached the Court belatedly, it will have a cascading consequences in the
administration as well as in the revenue of the State exchequer.There cannot be
any parity with Pandaram, who approached the Court in time and got the remdy
and for the said reason, this Court allowed the Writ Appeal filed by him and set
aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge insofar as granting of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
pensionary benefit with notional period of service as 60 years.
8.For the reasons aforesaid, W.A(MD)No.706 of 2010 filed by the State is
allowed and WA(MD)No.1306 of 2011 filed by the Writ Petitioner is dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
[G.J.,J.] [R.P.,J.]
18.02.2025
NCS : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
vsn
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Municipal Administration and Water Supply
(Na.Pa.1)Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai -600 009.
2.The Director of Municipal Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Commissioner,
Tenkasi Municipality,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tenkasi,
Tirunelveli District.
4.The Director,
Local Fund Audit,
4th Floor,
Kuralagam Complex,
Chennai – 600 105.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
and
R.POORNIMA ,J.
vsn
COMMON JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A(MD)Nos.1306 of 2011 and 706 of 2010
and
M.P(MD)Nos.1 of 2010 and 3 of 2011
18.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
