IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 28.02.2011 CORAM: THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.No.44811 of 2006 (O.A.No.8828 of 2000) P.T.Thulasingam ...Petitioner Vs 1.The Accounts Officer, Office of the Accountant General, (Accounts & Entitlement), Chennai. 2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai 600 006. 3.The Commissioner, Chennai Corporation, Chennai 600 003. ...Respondents Prayer :Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents to pay pension and other retirement benefits taking into account the service rendered by the petitioner from 1.2.1957 to 16.7.1967 in the Madras Corporation School. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Selvakumar For Respondents : Mr.V.Vijayashankar for R1 Mr.R.Murali, G.A. For R2 Mr.C.Kalaichelvan for R3 O R D E R
The petitioner filed O.A.No.8828 of 2000 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, seeking for a direction to pay pension and other retirement benefits taking into account the service rendered by him from 01.02.1957 to 16.07.1967 in the school run by the Chennai Municipal Corporation under the control of the third respondent.
2. The writ petition was admitted on 01.12.2000. On notice from the Tribunal, the second respondent filed a reply affidavit dated 20.06.2002. On behalf of the first respondent, a counter affidavit dated 14.02.2011 was filed.
3. In view of the abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court and was re-numbered as W.P.No.44811 of 2006.
4. It is an admitted case that the petitioner joined as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the Corporation School under the control of the third respondent and worked in the school from 1957 to 1967. Thereafter, he was appointed as a Graduate Assistant in a Government Higher Secondary School and worked in that capacity from 1968 to 1991. He retired from service on 31.05.1991. After his retirement, he was given the pensionary benefits for the services rendered by him in the Government School from 1968 to 1991, but his earlier services rendered in the Corporation School from February 1957 to 16.07.1967 was not considered.
5. The petitioner placed reliance upon an order passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.33, Education Department, dated 10.01.1989, wherein services rendered by college teachers in Government and aided colleges and subsequently taking up employment in University and vice versa were directed to be counted for the purpose of pension. The petitioner hence sent a representation dated 15.07.1991 seeking for full pension followed by a further letter to the Government. He was informed by the second respondent by proceedings dated 13.06.1996 that appropriate proposal should be sent through Headmaster and District Educational Officer. The petitioner also sent a representation to the first respondent and thereafter filed the Original Application.
6. In the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, it was indicated that the request of the petitioner for granting relief in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1574, Education Department, dated 27.07.1996 cannot be considered without relevant documents viz., Service Register for the said period. Therefore, unless the petitioner produces relevant documents, the same cannot be considered.
7. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent in paragraphs 4 to 6, it was averred as follows:-
“4. It is submitted that in reply to the petitioners representation to this Respondent’s office, specific order from Government for counting the Corporation Service was sought for as there was no Government orders for counting the Madras Corporation service. Further on 8.7.1991 a certificate of acceptance for taking the liability of pension for the Corporation service period was sought for by this Respondent.
5.It is submitted that Government in G.O.Ms.No.171 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (MC111) Department dated 26.11.2002 have laid down modalities regarding pattern of sharing costs in respect of pension liabilities of Teaching and non-teaching staff of Chennai and other Corporations. As per the Government orders capitalized value of pension for the service under Corporations have to be remitted in to Government account in order to count that service.
6.Therefore, it is respectfully submitted that, on remittance of the pension liability by the Madras Corporation and on receipt of revised proposals from the Government Higher Secondary School, Nayaganpettai, Kancheepuram District the pensionary benefits of the petitioner would be revised as per Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978.”
8. Under Rule 12(5) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1970, it is provided that Temporary Local Body Employee appointed to the State Government is allowed to count the qualifying service rendered under the Local body. Rule 12(5) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules reads as follows:-
“12(5)(a)Temporary Local Body employee or State Government servant who has been appointed under the State Government service or under any Local Body as the case may be, shall be allowed to count his qualifying service rendered under the respective Local Body or the State Government Service as the case may be, for the grant of pension by the State Government or Local Body from where he eventually retires, in respect of the following two categories, namely:-
(i) Person who having been retrenched from the service of the Local Body or State Government, secures employment under the State Government of Local Body, as the case may be, either with or without interruption of service from the date of retrenchment; and
(ii) Person who, while holding temporary post under the State Government or Local Body applies for a post under any Local Body or State Government, as the case may, through proper channel or with proper permission of the administrative authority concerned.
(b)The pensionary liability shall be shared between the respective Local Body and the Government, as the case may be, on the basis of length of qualifying service rendered under each of them:
[Provided that when a person retires on or after the 1st April 1987 the liability for pension including gratuity shall be borne in full by the respective Local Body or the State Government as the case may be under which such pension has been permanently absorbed at the time of retirement.]”
9. The State Government had also issued G.O.Ms.No.171, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 26.11.2002 agreeing to provide pension for the teaching and non-teaching staff who worked in the Corporation of Chennai and retired on or after 01.04.1990 to be taken over by the Government with effect from 01.10.2002. Hence, there is no justification in denying the claim of petitioner for counting his services rendered under the third respondent as a qualifying service for getting pension.
10. In the light of the above, the writ petition stands allowed. The third respondent is directed to send appropriate proposals through the second respondent to the first respondent Accountant General. The said proposal shall be sent within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such receipt of the proposal, the first respondent is directed to pass orders within eight weeks thereafter and communicate the result to the petitioner. No costs.
svki
To
1.The Accounts Officer,
Office of the Accountant General,
(Accounts & Entitlement),
Chennai.
2.The Director of School Education,
College Road,
Chennai 600 006.
3.The Commissioner,
Chennai Corporation,
Chennai 600 003