S. CHINNAKULANDAI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ on hand has been instituted questioning the validity of the rejection order dated November, 2013, rejecting the claim of the petitioner to count 50% of the service rendered in the post of part-time Panchayat Clerk for reckoning the qualifying service and to settle the terminal and pensionary benefits.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as part-time Panchayat Clerk on 5/1/1980 on consolidated pay. On 1/1/1991, he was appointed as Panchayat Assistant and on 15/11/1999, he was promoted as Junior Assistant. Thereafter, he was appointed as Rural Welfare Officer Grade-II on 1/7/2002 and further promoted to the post of Assistant on 31/12/2004. The petitioner reached the age of superannuation and retired from service as Assistant on 30/4/2010.

(3.) The petitioner states that the respondents have not counted the services rendered by him as part-time Panchayat Clerk from 5/1/1980 to 1/1/1991 and as Panchayat Assistant from 1/1/1991 to 14/11/1999 for the purpose of reckoning the qualifying services for grant of terminal and pensionary benefits, as per the amendment made to Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Pension Rules'). Thus, the petitioner submitted a representation relying on the Government Orders passed and based on Rule 11(4) of the Pension Rules to the respondents, who in turn rejected the claim, on the ground that the petitioner served as part-time Panchayat Clerk and therefore, 50% of the services cannot be counted for the purpose of granting pensionary benefits. Thus, the petitioner has chosen to file the present Writ Petition challenging the said order of rejection.