High Court Madras High Court

S. Gajendiran vs The Secretary To Government on 15 October, 2009

Madras High Court
S. Gajendiran vs The Secretary To Government on 15 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED  :  15.10.2009

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

W.P.No.5795 of 2007 

S. Gajendiran 					... 		Petitioner

     Vs.

1. The Secretary to Government
    revenue Department,
    Fort St. George
    Chennai  9.

2. The Principal Accountant General,
    (Accounts and entitlements) of Tamil nadu,
    Chennai  18. 				... 		Respondents
		
PRAYER: This writ petition came to be numbered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorified Mandamus, by way of transfer of O.A.No.1784 of 2002  from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer  to call for the records in respect of the impugned government order namely G.O.Ms.No.121, Revenue (SER 7) department, dated 13.03.2001 passed by the first respondent and subsequent impugned proceedings of the 2nd respondent vide his proceedings in Pen 1/1 VAO/C 990 / Rev dated 18.02.2002 and quash the same. 


	
		For Petitioner		:  Mr.R. Sureshkumar 
		For Respondents		:  Mrs. C.K.Vishnu Priya (for R1)
						   Additional Government Pleader

						   Mr. V. Vijayashankar (For R2)


					ORDER      

The petitioner received regular pension from 01.07.1994 up to February 2002. He received Rs.1,694/- as pension for February 2002, as mentioned in para VI.(7) of the Original Application filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. However, the payment of pension was stopped pursuant to the impugned order dated 18.02.2002 of the second respondent. The impugned order was passed, based on G.O.Ms.No.121, Revenue (SER 7) Department, dated 13.03.2001. According to this G.O, the Village Administrative Officers, who have not rendered 10 years of service, are not entitled to regular pension. On the other hand, they are entitled to only special pension. The petitioner was neither paid regular pension nor paid special pension after passing of the impugned order. He was not in receipt of any pension after the passing of the impugned order on 18.02.2002.

2. The petitioner filed Original Application in O.A.No. 1784 of 2002 (W.P.No.5795 of 2007) praying to quash the G.O.Ms.No.121, Revenue (SER 7) Department, dated 13.03.2001 and also the order dated 18.02.2002, of the second respondent.

3. Heard Mr.R.Sureshkumar, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mrs. C.K.Vishnu Priya, learned Additional Government Pleader for the first respondent and Mr.Vijayasankar, learned counsel for the second respondent.

4. The petitioner was a part-time Village Officer viz., Karnam. He was working as Village Karnam from 23.12.1966 to 14.11.1980. While so, the Tamil Nadu Ordinance No.10/80 was promulgated, abolishing the part-time Village Officers post. In view of the same, the petitioner lost his employment on 14.11.1980. However, the matter was taken up by the part-time Village Officers up to the Hon’ble Apex Court. Thereafter, qualified persons among the part time village officers were selected to a full-time post that was created, namely, Village Administrative Officers, pursuant to the abolition of the post of part-time Village Officers. The petitioner was one among the Village Administrative Officers, who was selected among the qualified part-time Village officers. He was appointed as a Village Administrative Officer on 08.03.1991. He reached the age of Superannuation on 30.06.1994 and retired from service. After his retirement from service, he was paid regular pension in accordance with G.O.Ms.No. 756, Revenue Department, dated 17.08.1993. The said G.O. provides for payment of pension for Village Administrative Officers, who were not able to render 10 years of service, by computing the service from the date of termination of their service, pursuant to the abolition of the part-time Village Administrative Officer.

5. The Government of Tamilnadu issued another G.O.828, Revenue Department, dated 23.08.1996 granting regular pension to the petitioner and the persons similarly situated.

6. It is stated by the second respondent that the petitioner is entitled to receive regular pension without any interruption. In view of the above statement of the second respondent, I am not going into the validity of the G.O.Ms.No.121 and also the order, dated 18.02.2002 of the second respondent. Hence the respondents are directed to pay pension from March 2002, if the pension was not already paid. The respondents are directed to comply with the direction within a period of 6 weeks from today.

With the above said direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

sms

To

1. The Secretary to Government
revenue Department,
Fort St. George
Chennai 9.

2. The Principal Accountant General,
(Accounts and entitlements) of Tamil Nadu,
Chennai 18