The Madras High Court dismissed a writ appeal challenging an order that recognized a teacher's service period for pensionary benefits. The bench held the issue is *res judicata* based on a binding Division Bench precedent.
The writ appeal and civil miscellaneous petition were dismissed; no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.08.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAJA and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
W.A.(MD) No.302 of 2018 and C.M.P.(MD)No.1780 of 2018
Secretariat, Chennai – 09.
: Appellants/ Respondents
Vs.
1.Thenmozhi (Died)
: 1st Respondent/Writ Petitioner
I.T.O.Higher Secondary School, Ayakudi Post – 624 613, Palani Taluk, Dindigul District.
: 2nd Respondent/5th Respondent
3.P.Subramanian
4.S.Vivekanandan
5.S.Sridar
6.S.RAmesh
:Respondents/3to6 implead Party
[Respondents 3 to 6 are brought on record as LRs of deceased First Respondent, vide Court order dated 28.04.2017 made in M.P.(MD) No.2/2014 in W.A.(MD) Sr.No.29665 of 2014 by TSSJ & NSSJ)
PRAYER: The writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent, as
2
against the order dated 21.02.2014 made in W.P.(MD)No.14651 of 2012.
Prayer in WP(MD). 14651/ 2012 :
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in pursuant to the impugned order passed by the 2nd Respondent in O. Mu.No.58399/W5/E2/2012 dated 14.08.2012 and quash the same and consequently direct the Respondents to take into account the period i.e from 04.10.1989 to 04.06.2002, served by the Petitioner in the 5th Respondent School without financial assistance for the purpose of pay fixation and pensionary benefits.
For Appellants : Mr.C.Ramar Additional Government Pleader For Respondent 2 : Mr.Babu Rajendran for Mr.M.R.Murugesan For Respondents : Mr.M.Saravanakumar 3 to 6
ORDER
(Judgment of this Court was delivered by T.RAJA, J.)
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 21.02.2014 passed in W.P.(MD)No.14651 of 2012 in and by which the learned Single Judge has held that on the basis of the judgment passed in W.A.(MD)Nos.291 and 292 of 2008, dated 22.06.2008 holding that even though aid has been granted subsequently inasmuch as the teacher concerned is appointed in a sanctioned and approved post, she is entitled to count her service from the date of actual appointment. Therefore, when the learned Single Judge passed the order on the basis of the judgment made in W.A.(MD) Nos.291 and 292 of 2008, dated 22.06.2008, allowing the Writ Petition holding that the issue raised is no longer res integra , it is not known why the Writ Appeal has been filed. Hence, we are unable to see any arguable point and moreover, the issue raised was already concluded in W.A.(MD)Nos.291 and 292 of 2008. Further, We are bound by the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the afore said Writ Appeals. Therefore, the Writ Appeal fails and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar (CO)
Sub Assistant Registrar(CS-II)
3
To
MK/SKN/SAR 2/17.09.2018/3P/6C
W.A.(MD) No.302 of 2018 and C.M.P.(MD)No.1780 of 2018 28.08.2018
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ appeal can succeed against an order holding the service period issue is concluded by a Division Bench.
Whether the Single Judge was error-bound in relying on the precedent regarding service counting for teachers in sanctioned posts.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.A.(MD) Nos.291 and 292 of 2008Relied on¶33
2 provisions across 2 enactments
The State of Tamil Nadu
The Secretary, I.T.O. Higher Secondary School, Ayakudi
Thenmozhi (Deceased)
T. RAJA
KRISHNAN RAMASAMY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
