Bharathidasan S Vs The Secretary to Government

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus mandamus calling for the records of the impugned orders issued by the third respondent I.e., the District Collector, Virudhunagar, in his Na.Ka.A-38/13/2025-A3, dated 25.11.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent I.e., the Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Chennai, to count the entire services of the petitioner in the cadre of Village Assistant and

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

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

¶16

W.P.(MD) No.4111 of 2026

¶17

in the cadre of Office Assistant and sanction full pension within a specified time frame.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Visvalingam For Respondents : Mrs.K.Porkodi Counsel for the Government

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

Heard Mr.S.Visvalingam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.K.Porkodi, learned counsel for the Government, appearing for the respondents.

¶21

2. It is the case of the petitioner that he was initially appointed as Thalayari and served as such from 09.05.1989 to 31.05.1995. Thereafter, he was absorbed in the regular time scale of pay as Village Assistant with effect from 01.06.1995 in terms of G.O.(Perm) No.625, Revenue Department, dated 06.07.1995 and continued as such till 31.10.2019. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Office Assistant through proceedings dated 01.11.2019. Subsequently, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation and retired from service on 28.02.2023. However, the pension was fixed without taking into consideration the service rendered by the petitioner as Village Assistant from 01.06.1995 to 31.10.2019. Hence, the petitioner claims to have

¶22

Page 2 of 6

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.(MD) No.4111 of 2026

¶25

submitted a representation requesting revision of his pension duly taking into consideration the service rendered by him as Village Assistant and Office Assistant. However, the same was rejected by the third respondent through the impugned proceedings. Challenging the same, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

¶26

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the very same issue of counting the service rendered as Village Assistant for the purpose of pensionary benefits had fallen for consideration before the learned Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.1200 of 2025 etc. [ The Additional Chief

¶27

Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department and others Vs. K. Marimuthu and others ]. The learned Division Bench of this Court, vide Judgment dated 03.02.2026, held that the Village Assistants, whose services were regularised in terms of G.O.(Perm) No. 625, Revenue Department, dated 06.07.1995, are entitled to count their entire service as Village Assistant for the purpose of pensionary benefits.

¶28

4. Learned counsel for the Government appearing for the respondents fairly submits that the claim made by the petitioner is covered by the Judgment of the learned Division Bench of this Court relied upon by the

¶29

_____________ Page 3 of 6_

¶30

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

¶31

W.P.(MD) No.4111 of 2026

¶32

learned counsel for the petitioner and further submits that the case of the petitioner would be considered by the respondents in accordance with law and that appropriate orders would be passed.

¶33

5. In the light of the above, the impugned proceedings issued by the third respondent is hereby quashed and the writ petition is allowed with a direction to the third respondent to submit a revised pension proposal duly taking into consideration the services rendered by the petitioner as Village Assistant and Village Administrative Officer to the first respondent, based on the petitioner’s representation as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the first respondent is directed to pass orders sanctioning full pension to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the pension proposal from the third respondent. No costs.

¶34

10.06.2026

¶35

(4/4)

¶36

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No

¶37

krk

¶38

_____________ Page 4 of 6_

¶39

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