S. SUMATHI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order refusing to place her under Old Pension Scheme and for a direction to the respondents to place her under Old Pension Scheme based on the initial date of her appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher on 24.03.2003 in the 7th respondent School viz., Jeya Primary School, Madurai, including the petitioner's joining in the Panchayat Union Middle School, Attapatti, Kottampatti Union, Madurai District on 06.06.2007 and by calculating entire service periods.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in the 7th respondent aided school on 24.03.2003 and she was placed under Old Pension Scheme. Subsequently, she resigned the said post for the purpose of joining as Secondary Grade Teacher in the 8th respondent - Panchayat Union Middle School and accordingly, she was relieved on 31.05.2007 from the 7th respondent school. She joined in the Panchayat Union School on 06.06.2007, in view of holidays of the school between 01.06.2007 and 05.06.2007. Stating that there is break-in-service for five days, the petitioner was placed under Contributory Pension Scheme. Though the petitioner has been making repeated representations to the respondents for placing her under Old Pension Scheme, they were not considered by the respondents. When the petitioner approached this Court in W.P.(MD).No.1382 of 2015 seeking a direction to the respondents to place her under Old Pension Scheme, this Court, by order dated 05.02.2015, directed the respondents to consider a fresh representation to be submitted by the petitioner within a stipulated time. Accordingly, the petitioner has sent her fresh representation to the respondents. The 3rd respondent, by the impugned order dated 16.06.2015, has rejected the case of the petitioner on the ground that she has resigned the earlier post and then, joined in the subsequent post with break of service for five days. He would further submit that as per Rule 25 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, the interruption between two spells of service would be automatically condoned and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be placed in Old Pension Scheme. He would next submit that the case of the similarly placed persons by name V.M.Loyola, A.Sakila, A.Aristotile and G.Prishilla were considered by the respondents subsequently and they were placed under Old Pension scheme. But, the petitioner alone has been discriminated. Thus, he prayed to allow this petition.

(3.) Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents submitted that the petitioner has joined in the 8th respondent school after resigning her earlier post in the 7th respondent school and therefore, her earlier service cannot be taken into account, as per Rule 41 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules. He would further submit that there is also break -in- service of five days and therefore, the claim of the petitioner cannot be considered. The 3rd respondent has rightly passed the impugned order and therefore, the same need not be interfered with. Thus, he prayed to dismiss this petition.