The Court dismissed a writ petition filed to implement an earlier judgment granting old pension scheme benefits. It held that filing a fresh petition is impermissible and the remedy for non-compliance is to seek contempt proceedings.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
W.P.No.4481 of 2021
and WMP.No.5109 of 2021
-vs-
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to issue suitable instructions to the 2nd respondent enabling him to bring the petitioners under Old Pension Scheme from the date of his eligibility in terms of the judgment passed by Division Bench dated 10.06.2019 in W.A.No.701 of 2019 and as per para 45(ii) of Full Bench Judgment reported in 2019 (6) CTC page 705 and consequentially to direct the 2nd respondent to grant all eligible benefits including suitable interest to the petitioner.
For Petitioners: Mr.P.L.Thirumoorthy For Respondents: Mr.J.Pothiraj Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed, seeking a direction to the first respondent to issue suitable instructions to the 2nd respondent enabling him to bring the petitioners under Old Pension Scheme from the date of his eligibility in terms of the judgment passed by Division Bench dated 10.06.2019 in W.A.No.701 of 2019 and as per para 45(ii) of Full Bench Judgment reported in 2019 (6) CTC page 705 and consequentially to direct the 2nd
respondent to grant all eligible benefits including suitable interest to the petitioner.
“11. However, from a perusal of the proceedings of the 2nd respondent, it is seen that the writ petitioners were appointed on a consolidated pay on 02.11.1998 and thereafter by order of this Court they were regularised with effect from 17.11.2001, which is much prior to the introduction of the New Pension Scheme. The writ petitioners are entitled to the Old Pension Scheme since they have been brought under the Regular Time Scale as early as in the year 2001. In fact, by proceedings in Na.Ka.No.477/2015 dated 16.10.2015, the 2nd respondent has fixed the revised pay scale for the 1st petitioner with effect from 17.11.2001.
In view of the above there is no merits in the writ appeal. The Writ Appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous petition is also closed.”
the Constitution are supreme than the powers enumerated under the Contempt of Courts Act.
-s/d-
Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
dpq
To
W.P.No.4481 of 2021 and WMP.No.5109 of 2021
RLD(CO) LS(14/07/2021)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether filing a fresh writ petition for implementation of an earlier judgment is impermissible for aggrieved employees.
Whether the remedy for non-compliance with a court order lies in contempt proceedings rather than a separate writ petition.
P. Mathiarasu
S. Palanisamy
P. Mariappan
The Director of Town Panchayat
The Executive Officer, Aravakurchi Town Panchayat
S. Vaidyanathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
S. Vaidyanathan
Parties & counsel
