(1.) WRIT petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a WRIT of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the letter bearing No.28715/E4/2009-3 dated 9.4.2010 of the first respondent and quash the same and further direct the first respondent to grant minimum pension to the petitioner from 1.9.2000 with all consequential benefits such as pension, arrears etc. The petitioner has come forward with this petition seeking for the relief of quashing the proceedings of the 1st respondent dated 9.4.2010 in letter bearing No.28715/E4/2009-3 and further directing the first respondent to grant minimum pension to the petitioner from 1.9.2000 with all consequential benefits such as pension, arrears etc.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was working as an Assistant in the Rural Development Department at Tirunelveli District. Initially he was appointed as part time Clerk at Kadayam Panchayat with effect from 24.10.1964. THE petitioner was subsequently appointed as Junior Assistant with effect from 1.1.1991. THE petitioner, ultimately on reaching the age of superannuation, retired on 31.8.2000. THE petitioner has put in 9 year and 8 months of service i.e., from 1.1.1991 to 31.8.2000. In order to get the minimum pension, an incumbent has to put in atleast ten years i.e., twenty half yearly as qualifying service. In respect of the case of the petitioner, he was shortage of 4 months to grant minimum pension. THE petitioner also remitted a sum of Rs.644/- as pension contribution for a period of four months in order to complete 10 years of service for grant of minimum pension.
(3.) THE 1st respondent by its letter dated 9.4.2010 informed the petitioner that as per G.O.Ms.No.408 Finance (Pension) dated 25.8.2009 only 50% of the service in full time panchayat Assistant can be considered as pensionable service and Rule 43(2) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules') contemplates that an incumbent is eligible for pension only when he renders minimum service of 10 years and in the instant case, the petitioner has rendered only 19 half years and 2 months of service and as such the petitioner does no satisfy rule 43(2) of the Rules and thereby rejected the claim of the petitioner. Being aggrieved against the said order, the petitioner has preferred this petition with the above said prayer.