The petitioner, a retired employee, sought a writ mandamus for pensionary benefits calculated by crediting 50% of his temporary service pre-regularization. The Court disposed of the petition by directing the respondents to apply the precedent set by the Full Bench in W.A.No.158 of 2016. No specific relief was granted in this order.
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.
W.P.(MD)Nos.5848 of 2015
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.11.2020 CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.(MD)No.5848 of 2015
S.Dhuraisamy ... Petitioner
Vs.
Chennai-108.
Nagercoil.
3.The Executive Officer, Puthalam Town Panchayat, Puthalam & Post, Kanyakumari District. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus,directing the respondents to provide the petitioner pensionary benefits taking into account 50 percent of the service on temporary basis before regularisation on 23.06.2006.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.T.Perumal For R1 & R2 : Mr.V.Anand Government Advocate For R3 : Mr.M.Govindan
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the respondents to provide the petitioner's pensionary benefits taking into account 50 percent of the services on temporary basis before regularisation on 23.06.2006.
2.The petitioner was appointed as Drinking Water Attender in the third respondent Town Panchayat on daily wage basis. He was subsequently promoted to the post of Office Assistant in the regular time scale of pay. The services of the petitioner were regularised as Meter Reader with effect from 23.06.2006 in a time scale of pay. The petitioner retired from service on 31.05.2014.
3.The grievances of the petitioner is that the temporary services rendered by him has not been taken into account for the purpose of calculating the qualifying services for grant of pensionary benefits. The Hon'ble Full Bench of the Madras High
1/2
W.P.(MD)Nos.5848 of 2015
Court settled the issues regarding the counting of 50% of the services with reference to Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 in W.A.No.158 of 2016 etc., batch, dated 03.12.2019.
4.The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner with reference to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in W.A.No.158 of 2016 etc., batch, dated 03.12.2019 and pass orders as expeditiously as possible.
5.With these directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
Assistant Registrar (CS III)
// True Copy //
/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
rmi
To
1.The Director of Town Panchayats, Kuralagam, Chennai-108.
2.The Assistant Director of Town Panchayats, Collectorate, Nagercoil.
3.The Executive Officer, Puthalam Town Panchayat, Puthalam & Post, Kanyakumari District.
+1 CC to M/s.C.T. PERUMAL, Advocate ( SR-23073[F] dated 27/11/2020 )
+1 CC to M/s.GP ( SR-23157[F] dated 27/11/2020 )
W.P.(MD)No.5848 of 2015 26.11.2020
PU(CO)
KK(03.12.2020) 2 P 6C
2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pensionary benefits considering 50 percent of services rendered on a temporary basis prior to regularization.
Whether the Full Bench judgment in W.A.No.158 of 2016 applies to the petitioner's case.
S.Dhuraisamy
The Director of Town Panchayats, Kuralagam
The Assistant Director of Town Panchayats, Collectorate, Nagercoil
The Executive Officer, Puthalam Town Panchayat
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
