Dismissed

C.Venkateswaran, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC11 Mar 2024WP/926/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Grade III Librarians sought inclusion under the Old Pension Scheme, counting half their consolidated-pay service as Village Librarians under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978. Relying on a Full Bench judgment dated 03.12.2019 in W.A.No.158 of 2016 holding such employees absorbed after 01.04.2003 cannot count past service, the Court dismissed the writ petition.

What the court decided

AI extract

C.Venkateswaran, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.03.2024

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶5

Writ Petition No.926 of 2018

¶6

1.C.Venkateswaran Grade III Librarian S/o Chinnappa Gounder 1/277, Aruvangkattur, Polavakalipalayam, Gobichettipalayam 638 476, Erode(DT).

¶7

2.V.Murali, Grade III Librarian, S/o R.Venkatesan, R.D-18, Sampath Nagar, Erode 638 011.

¶8

3.S.Vasanthi, Grade III Librarian, W/o G.Nandhakumar, 7, Kori Street,Nerijipettai 638 311. Erode(DT).

¶9

4.G.Vijayapurirani, Grade III Librarian, D/o M.P.Ganesan, Poosariur, Patlur, Andhiyur, Erode 638 314.

¶10

5.K.R.Premalatha,

¶11

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶12

1/9

¶13

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶14

Grade III Librarian, W/o M.Arumugam, 4, Middle Street, Arachalur 638 101, Erode(DT).

¶15

6.C.Sudha, Grade III Librarian, W/o T.Ravichandran, 32/6, Mohana Apartments, Pethampalayam Road, Perundurai 638 052.

¶16

7.M.P.Subramaniam, Grade III Librarian, S/o V. Palanisamy, 22A, Machimuthupudur, Dharapuram 638 657, Tirupur(DT).

¶17

8.M.Govindaraj, Grade III Librarian, S/o R.Muthusamy, Madathupalayam, Thoppampatti, Dharapuram 638 657, Thirupur (DT).

¶18

9.K.Malleeswaran Grade III Librarian, S/o R.Kandiyannan, 135/1, Alagaburi Elavanatham (Po) Arachalur (via) Erode(Dist) 638 101.

¶19

2/9

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

10.A.Venkatachalam, Grade III Librarian, S/o R.Appachi, 101/200, Nallagoundanpudur, Vairamangalam(Po), Erode(Dist) 638 312.

W.P.No.926 of 2018

.. Petitioners

/versus/

1.Government of Tamil nadu Represented by Principal Secretary of School Education Department, Secretariat, St.George Fort, Chennai 600 009.

¶26

2.The Director of Public Libraries, 737, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶27

3.The District Library Officer, office of the District Library Officer, Veerabathra Chetty Street, Erode 638 003.

¶28

4.The District Library Officer, Office of the District Library Officer, Tirupur.

¶29

.. Respondents

¶30

Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent in Rc.No.9096/A2/2015, dated 12.06.2017 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the respondents to include

¶31

3/9

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶34

them under the old pension scheme instead of the new Contributory Pension Scheme in considering and counting 50% of our service as Village Librarian on consolidated pay based on the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978 Rules Nos.11(2) and 12(2) G.O.Ms.No.183, E&F Department dated 18.07.2012 and G.O.Ms.No.113, E&F Department, dated 18.09.2015 prior to the date of promotion and regularization of Grade III Librarian dated 26.10.2006.

¶35

For Petitioners :Mr. S.Nambi Arooran For Respondents :Mr.V.Manoharan, AGP for R1 to R4

¶36

O R D E R

¶37

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to include the petitioners under the Old Pension Scheme instead of the New Contributory Pension Scheme in considering and counting 50% of their service as Village Librarian on consolidated pay based on the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

¶38

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and

¶39

the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4.

¶40

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶41

4/9

¶42

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶43

On behalf of the respondents, their counter affidavit has been filed. During the course of hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents has placed a copy of the judgment of a Full Bench dated 03.12.2019 in W.A.No.158 of 2016 and batch and contends that the issue involved in the present Writ Petition has already been decided by the Full Bench of this Court in the said order. He has also drawn an attention of this Court to the relevant paragraphs of the said judgment. Paragraph Nos.44 and 45 are extracted

¶44

hereunder:-

¶45

“44. The aforesaid Judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court would squarely apply to this case. Merely because this Court has passed multiple number of orders in favour of some of the similarly placed persons, like the writ petitioners, it will not operate as res judicata or it will preclude the State Government from, questioning those orders, in a parallel or similar proceedings. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the orders, hitherto passed by this Court, both single Bench or the Division Bench will not operate as a bar for maintaining these writ appeals or writ petitions or those orders will not be considered as the one which laid down any binding precedent

¶46

5/9

¶47

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶48

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶49

to be followed in other cases. An order, which was not passed in accordance with the statutory provisions, need not be followed by the Court at the instance of similarly placed persons.

¶50

In the light of the above, we answer the reference as follows:-

¶51

(i) Those who are freshly appointed on or after 01.04.2003 are not entitled to pension in view of proviso to Rule 2 of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 inserted by G.O. Ms. No. 259 dated 06.08.2003.

¶52

(ii) Those government servants/employees appointed prior to 01.04.2003 whether on temporary or permanent basis in terms of Rule 10 (a) (i) of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules will be entitled to get pension as per the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

¶53

(iii) In case, a government employee/servant had also rendered service in non-provincialised service, or on consolidated pay or on honorarium or daily wage basis and if such services were regularised before 01.04.2003, half of such service rendered shall be counted for the purpose of conferment of pensionary benefits.

¶54

(iv) Those government servants who were appointed in the aforesaid four categories before the cut off date and later appointed under Rule 10 (a) (i) of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules before 01.04.2003 and absorbed

¶55

6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶56

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶57

into regular service after 01.04.2003 will not be entitled to count half of their past service for the purpose of determination of qualifying service for pension.

¶58

(v) Those government servants who were appointed in the aforesaid four categories before 01.04.2003 but were absorbed in regular service after 01.04.2003 will not be entitled to count half of their past service for the purpose of determination of qualifying service for pension."

¶59

On perusal of the same, this Court is of the considered view

¶60

that the petitioners are not entitled for the relief sought for in the present Writ Petition, in the light of the judgment of the Full Bench cited supra.

¶61

Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed.

¶62

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶63

11.03.2024

¶64

ari Index:yes/no Speaking order/non speaking order Neutral citation:yes/no

¶65

7/9

¶66

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶67

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶68

To:

¶69

1.Government of Tamil nadu Represented by Principal Secretary of School Education Department, Secretariat, St.George Fort, Chennai 600 009.

¶70

2.The Director of Public Libraries, 737, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

¶71

3.The District Library Officer, office of the District Library Officer, Veerabathra Chetty Street, Erode 638 003.

¶72

4.The District Library Officer, Office of the District Library Officer, Tirupur.

¶73

8/9

¶74

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶75

W.P.No.926 of 2018

¶76

BATTU DEVANAND,J.

ari

W.P.No.926 of 2018

11.03.2024

9/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

C.Venkateswaran, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

C.Venkateswaran, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Lakshmi Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Ar.Ramanathan Vs The Registrar

K.Pandiarajan Vs The Registrar

S.Ellammal Vs The Secretary to Government

R.Jagannivasan Vs The Principal Secretary

S.Selvaraj, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu