Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2009
  6. /
  7. January

K.Thangaraj vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep

Madras High Court|30 June, 2009

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a direction to the respondents to grant pension and other consequential benefits to the petitioner from the date of his retirement, i.e. 31.10.2000, by taking into account, 50% of the service rendered by him as a casual labourer, as well as his continuous regular time scale of pay services.
3. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had placed before this Court a Government Order in G.O.(Ms) No.60, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (AH7) Department, dated 24.4.2007, which reads as follows:
"In the Government Order-first read above, orders have been issued for counting of 50 percent of services rendered by Thiru.M.Alagar, Animal Husbandry Assistant and 32 others in the post of casual labourers for the purpose of calculation of pension, consequent on the orders passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.3282/99, dated 20.12.2001.
2. Tvl.V.Rangaiah and 20 other Animal Husbandry Assistants in Animal Husbandry Department have filed W.P.No.93/06, 9078/06, 9083/06, 9137/06, 9177/06 and 9191/06, praying for counting 50 percent of their services rendered in the post of casual labourers for calculating pension. The High Court of Madras has directed to consider and pass orders on the representation of petitioners in the event the orders issued in the Government order first read above are applicable to them.
3. In the reference third read above the Commissioner and Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services has requested the Government to issue general orders in respect of both the retired and serving Animal Husbandry Assistants in the Animal Husbandry Department extending the benefits of Government order first read above to all of them.
4. The Government have examined the proposal of the Commissioner and Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services taking into consideration of the direction issued by the High Court, Madras in its judgement second read above and decided to accept it. The Government accordingly direct that the orders issued in the Government order first read above to certain Animal Husbandry Assistants for counting 50 percent of the services rendered by them in the post of casual labourers in Animal Husbandry Department together with the regular service as Animal Husbandry Assistant for the calculation of pension, be extended to all the similarly placed Animal Husbandry Assistants, both retired and serving, subject to the conditions prescribed in G.O.(Ms) No.437, Finance Department, dated 23.6.1988.
5. This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department, vide its U.O.No.23052/AH&F/07, dated 17.4.2007."
4. It has been stated by the learned counsel appearing for the respondents that in view of the said Government Order, the petitioner is eligible for the payment of pensionary benefits, taking into account 50% of the service rendered by him in the post of Casual Labourer in the Animal Husbandry Department.
5. However, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has not been in a position to state as to whether the pensionary benefits due to the petitioner has been paid, in accordance with the Government Order, in G.O.(Ms) No.60, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (AH7) Department, dated 24.4.2007.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties concerned, the respondents are directed to pay the pensionary benefits due to the petitioner, in accordance with the Government Order in G.O.(Ms) No.60, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (AH7) Department, dated 24.4.2007, if it has not been paid till date, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs.
csh To
1. The Secretary, State of Tamilnadu Animal Husbandry & Fisheries Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director of Veterinary Services, DMS Compound, Teynampet, Chennai 6
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

K.Thangaraj vs The State Of Tamilnadu Rep

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
30 June, 2009