IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.3.2009
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.39819 OF 2006
G. Grace Jaya ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Director of Elementary Education
College Road, Chennai.
2. The District Elementary Education
Officer, Madurai.
3. The Accountant General, Chennai. ... Respondents
This writ petition came to be numbered before this Court in O.A.No.2399 of 1999 from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai to this Court praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to take into account the service rendered by the petitioner from 1962 to 1979 for pension and other terminal benefits and her pay the benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr. R.Muthukannu
For Respondents : Mr. P. Subramanian
Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
The prayer in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to take into account the service rendered by the petitioner from 1962 to 1979 for pension and other terminal benefits.
2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as a Higher Grade Teacher in a Private School in the year 1962 and in the year 1969, the petitioner along with other staff members of the school was taken over by the Panchayat Union. The petitioner was dismissed from service by order dated 7.8.1979. The said order of dismissal was challenged before this Court by filing writ petition and the same was dismissed. Writ Appeal No.474 of 1979 filed having also been dismissed, the petitioner filed Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.9149 of 1980 and by order 27.8.1984, the Honourable Supreme Court passed the following order:
” After hearing counsel for the respondent, it seems that the State Government is not in a mood to give any backwages nor any monetary benefits on account of the past services of the petitioner. But the State Government is willing to reinstate the petitioner as a fresh appointee and they have already passed the order to that effect. It will be open to the petitioner to accept that offer and join the service, if so advised, within three weeks from today. With these observations, the special petition is disposed of.”
3. The petitioner appointed as a fresh entrant from 4.6.1984 as per the assurance given before the Supreme Court by the respondents. The petitioner also accepted the said offer of appointment and the petitioner was re-employed till the end of the academic year i.e. Till 31.5.1998 and the petitioner is also receiving pension.
4. Now, the grievance of the petitioner is that the earlier services rendered prior to appointment afresh i.e., from 1962 to 1979 should be counted for the purpose of pension and other terminal benefits. The order of the Supreme Court extracted above clearly states that the State Government is not in a mood to offer any backwages nor any
monetary benefits on account of the past services of the petitioner and the State Government was willing to reinstate the petitioner as a fresh appointee and it was ordered that it is open to the petitioner to accept the said offer and join the service, if so advised within three weeks. The said order was passed by the Supreme Court on 27.8.1984 and the petitioner also accepted the said offer and joined as afresh from 4.6.1984.
5. In view of the said order of the Supreme Court and having regard to the fact that the petitioner has given up her right for the earlier period, it is not open to the petitioner now to pray for counting the said period i.e. from 1962 to 1979 for terminal benefits and pension. No case is made out to pass an order in favour of the petitioner to allow the claim. There is no merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs.
Index : Yes/No 25.3.2009
Website : Yes/No
kb
To
1. The Director of Elementary Education
College Road, Chennai.
2. The District Elementary Education
Officer, Madurai.
3. The Accountant General, Chennai.
N. PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR, J.
kb
W.P.No.39819 of 2006
25.3.2009