Madras High Court
D.Sudhakar vs The Secretary To Government on 25 March, 2025
WP(MD).No.11222 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
WP(MD).No.11222 of 2019
D.Sudhakar .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Secretary To Government,
Education Department,
Tamil Nadu Government,
Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Director Of School
Education, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
3.The Joint Director Of School
Education, (higher Education),
College Road,
Chennai.
4.The Chief Educational Officer,
Chief Education Office,
Virudhunagar.
5.The Headmaster,
Government Higher Secondary School,
Reserve Line, Sivakasi West,
Virudhunagar District.
_________
Page 1 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
WP(MD).No.11222 of 2019
6.The Headmaster,
Y.R.T.V.Matric Higher Sec School,
Sivakasi,
Virudhunagar District. .. Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the
impugned order passed by the fourth respondent in his proceedings
No.Na.Ka.No.3061/Aa1/2018 dated 03.09.2018 and consequential order
passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings No.Na.Ka. No.
037466/W3/E2/2018 dated 18.03.2019 and quash the same as illegal and
also consequently direct the respondents one to three to count the service
rendered by the petitioner as P.G. Economics Teacher in recognized
Y.R.T.V. Matric Higher Secondary, School, Sivakasi from 15.06.1990 to
13.12.2012 for the purpose of pay fixation, pension and other benefits on
the basis of the fourth respondent proceedings in e.f.vz;.5226/M2/2014
dated 08.08.2014 and consequential proceedings of the fifth respondent
in f.f.vz;29/2018 dated 15.02.2018 in the light of the G.O(Ms).No.143
Education Department dated 30.01.1987 to the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.P.Muthupandian
For RR 1 to 4 : Mr.R.R.Badurus Zaman
Government Advocate
For RR5 & 6 : -No Appearance-
_________
Page 2 of 11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
WP(MD).No.11222 of 2019
ORDER
Under assail is the order passed by the fourth respondent in
proceedings No.Na.Ka.No.3061/Aa1/2018 dated 03.09.2018.
2. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed as P.G.
Economics Teacher in the sixth respondent school on 15.06.1990. He had
been appointed as PG Economics Teacher with the sixth respondent
school, as per proceedings dated 04.05.2011. He passed PG Teacher
Recruitment Board, conducted by the Teacher's Recruitment Board,
during the year 2011-12 for the post of P.G. Assistant in Economics.
2(i). He has been appointed as P.G. Assistant as per the
proceedings of the third respondent dated 12.12.2012 and posted as
Government Higher Secondary School in Narikudi, Virudhunagar
District. He had received the job on 13.12.2012 due to Government
Employment. He had joined the service on 02.01.2013 and subsequently
to the fifth respondent school on 18.07.2013.
2(ii). The writ petitioner attained the age of superannuation on
31.04.2006. Any teacher who has completed ten years of service in
Government School, they are entitled for pension as per G.O(Ms).No.37
Education Department dated 05.01.1983. The service rendered in the
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
recognized or aided school can be taken into account for the fixation of
pay and pension. Subsequently, G.O(Ms).No. 143 Education Department
dated 30.01.1987 also recognized school services and taken into account
for calculation of pension and refixed the pay and consequential benefit.
2(iii). He made a representation on 09.05.2016 to the third
respondent to that effect but the respondent did not properly considered.
Thereafter, he was constrained to file WP(MD).No.8979 of 2018,
directing the respondents to count the service rendered by the petitioner
as PG Assistant Economics Teacher in the recognized Y.R.T.V.Matric
Higher Secondary School, Shivakasi from 15.06.1990 to 13.12.2012 for
the purpose of re-fixation, pension and other attendant benefits. This
Hon'ble Court vide order dated 24.03.2018 was pleased to direct the
respondents to consider the request of the writ petitioner, forwarded by
the fourth respondent vide proceedings dated 08.08.2014. Subsequently,
the order impugned came to be passed. Hence this writ petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner would
submit that the petitioner's service was rendered in the recognized school
and it is not an aided school. He would submit that the respondents have
passed a Government Order bearing G.O(Ms).No.37 Education
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
Department dated 05.01.1983 and G.O(Ms).No.143 Education
Department dated 30.01.1987, and G.O.(Ms).No.285 dated 12.03.1991
and G.O(Ms).No.18 dated 09.01.1997. As per the aforementioned
Government Orders, the writ petitioner is entitled to get the said benefits.
4. He would further submit that the third respondent ought to have
considered the service rendered by writ petitioner from 15.06.1990 to
13.12.2012 i.e., more than twenty two and a half year, rendering service
as PG Economics Teacher in the sixth respondent recognized school. To
strengthen his contention, he has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble
Division Bench dated 05.07.2018 in [WA.No.1267 of 2014] in the case
of The Secretary to the Government of Tamil Nadu Vs.
S.Veerabadran and the judgment of this Hon'ble Court in 28.02.2018 in
[WP(MD).No.20326 of 2013] in the case of K.Pitchai Vs. The State of
Tamil Nadu and Anr. to show that the petitioner is entitled to get the
said benefits by calculating the service rendered as PG Economic
Teacher in the sixth respondent recognized school.
5. Per-contra, the learned Government Advocate for the
respondents would submit that the writ petitioner would rely upon the
G.O(Ms).No. 143 Education Department dated 30.01.1987. Wherein it
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
has been provided to the service rendered by one Fr.Stanislaus in DON
Bosco Matriculation School in Goa and DON Bosco Matriculation
School in Madras and therein, the order passed for calculation pension
and other benefits. As per G.O(Ms).No.314 School Education
Department dated 12.12.2012, the Government had considered the
inclusion of the service rendered by the individual teacher in an
unapproved post in recognized school. Thereafter, the Government had
clarified the service rendered in recognized schools can be taken into
account for the purpose of promotion. However, the said service will not
be counted for the purpose of pay fixation and for grant of pensionary
benefits. He would also submit that as per Rule 1 of the “Tamil Nadu
Pension Rules, 1978” (hereinafter referred as Rules), it shall not apply to
the Government Service appointed on or after 1st of April 2003 to the
service and post in connection with the affairs of the State of Tamil
Nadu.
6. This Court has considered the submissions made on either side
and perused the material on record.
7. According to the learned counsel for the writ petitioner, the third
respondent that is the Joint Director of School Education, (Higher
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
Education), College Road, Chennai ought to have considered the service
rendered by the writ petitioner from 15.06.1990 to 13.12.2012 as PG
Economics Teacher in the sixth respondent school that is Y.R.T.V.Matric
Higher Secondary School, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District for promotion
basis.
8. It is seen from the typed set of papers, joined at Government
Higher Secondary School, Narikudi, Virudhunagar District, as per the
proceedings issued by the third respondent dated 12.12.2012 and he had
joined the service on 02.01.2013 and subsequently, he had transferred to
the fifth respondent school on 13.07.2013. At this juncture, it is relevant
to refer the Rules 1 & 2 of the said Rules which state 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
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
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;
(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 perusal of the order impugned, shows that wherein it has been
stated the period of service rendered by the writ petitioner i.e.,
15.06.1990 to 13.12.2012 in an unaided private matriculation school
cannot be taken into consideration by citing the Tamil Nadu Pension
Rules, 1978. As per Rule 1 (2), its application itself clearly enumerates
that the Rule shall not apply to the Government Servant appointed on or
after 1st of April 2003, to services. According to the writ petitioner, he has
joined in Government Service on 02.01.2013 and therefore, he cannot
claim the service already rendered by him in the fifth respondent school,
before joining into Government Service, by relying on various
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
Government Orders.
10. There is no merit in this writ petition, and the same is liable to
be dismissed. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
25.03.2025
NCC : Yes
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
nst
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
To
1.The Secretary To Government,
Education Department,
Tamil Nadu Government,
Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Director Of School
Education, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
3.The Joint Director Of School
Education, (higher Education),
College Road,
Chennai.
4.The Chief Educational Officer,
Chief Education Office,
Virudhunagar.
5.The Headmaster,
Government Higher Secondary School,
Reserve Line, Sivakasi West,
Virudhunagar District.
6.The Headmaster,
Y.R.T.V.Matric Higher Sec School,
Sivakasi,
Virudhunagar District.
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
nst
Dated: 25.03.2025
_________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/04/2025 04:40:43 pm )
