Allowed

V.Adhi Moolam v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Madras HC16 Jun 2015WP/11939/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a retired Forest Department employee, sought counting of 50% pre-regularisation daily wage service for pension. Court clarified tax liability as 50% of service rendered prior to regularisation plus regularized service.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to count 50% of pre-regularisation service for pension/terminal benefits and submit proposal in 12 weeks.

V.Adhi Moolam Vs The Government of Tamilnadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 16.06.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. HARIPARANTHAMAN

¶5

W.P.NO.11939 OF 2015

¶6

V.Adhi Moolam .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. By its Secretary Environment and Forest Department Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest Having office at Panagal Maaligai Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015. 3.The Conservator of Forests Tamil Nadu Forest Training Village Vaigai Dam, Coimbatore. 4.The Accountant General of Tamil Nadu Office at DMS Compound, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. .. Respondents

¶9

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to count half of the service rendered by the petitioner as Plot Watcher on daily wage basis from 01.12.1983 till 06.08.2009 along with the regular service rendered by him as Plot Watcher (Supernumerary post) and Forest Watcher from 07.08.2009 till the date of his retirement namely 30.04.2015 as qualifying service, send the revised proposal to the fourth respondent, grant pension to the petitioner with all consequential monetary benefits.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mani For Respondents 1to3 : Mr.N.Inbanathan Government Advocate (Forests) For Respondent 4 : Mr.V.Vijaya Shankar O R D E R

¶11

Heard both sides. Mr.N.Inbanathan, learned Government Advocate (Forests) takes notice for the respondents 1 to 3 and

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

Mr.V.Vijaya Shankar, learned counsel takes notice for the fourth respondent. By consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶14

2.The petitioner was appointed as Plot Watcher on 01.12.1983 in the Forest Department on daily wage basis. Thereafter, he was regularised in service as Plot Watcher (Supernumerary post) on 07.08.2009. He was promoted as Forest Watcher on 21.12.2010. He retired from service on 30.04.2015.

¶15

3.The grievance of the petitioner is that 50% of the services rendered by him prior to regularisation is not taken into account for the purpose of pension and other benefits as per Rule 11 (2) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. He has relied on a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.NOS.27 AND 28 OF 2012 DATED 13.02.2012 (GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT VS. M.GOPAL) which was confirmed by the Honourable Apex Court in SLP Nos.14838-14839 of 2012 on 10.05.2012. The Government implemented the same in G.O.Ms.No.183, Environment and Forests (FR-2) Department, dated 18.07.2012. Further, I have also passed an order in detail to count 50% of service rendered before regularisation in the case of P.CHINNIYAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [2014 (6) MLJ 316]. In this regard, the petitioner made a representation dated 10.09.2013 to the respondents 1 and 2.

¶16

4.In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to count 50% of service rendered by the petitioner before regularization along with the service rendered after regularization for the purpose of pension and other terminal benefits in the light of Rule 11(2) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules and also the judgments, referred to above and submit proposal for the terminal benefits for authorisation before the fourth respondent, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the fourth respondent is directed to authorise the same within a period of two weeks thereafter. No costs.

¶17

Sd/Assistant Registrar

¶18

True Copy

¶19

Sub Assistant Registrar To

¶20

1.The Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu Environment and Forest Department Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶21

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶22

2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest Having office at Panagal Maaligai Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015. 3.The Conservator of Forests Tamil Nadu Forest Training Village Vaigai Dam, Coimbatore.

¶23

4.The Accountant General of Tamil Nadu Office at DMS Compound, Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. +1 cc to Government Pleader,SR.29337 +1 cc to M/s.S.Mani, Advocate,SR.29240. Sai(co) krd 9/7 W.P.NO.11939 OF 2015

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

V.Adhi Moolam v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Adhi Moolam v. The Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

D.Nathiya Vs The Chariman cum Managing

G.Senthil Murugan Vs The Commissioner of Sugars

C.Venkatesan Vs The Chief Engineer (Personnel)

R.Ravivarmaraja, Vs the Director of Medical and

N.Balasubramanian Vs The Commissioner of Police

High Court Vs the Commissioner