By order dated 9.7.2009 made in M.P.No.2 of 2009, this writ petition is restored to file.
2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for disposal today.
3. The Writ Petition is filed praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent, to recognise contract period of service from 1.8.1990 to 1.5.1997 of the petitioners for purpose of service for pension purpose and to consider the salary and remuneration of the petitioners for future period commencing from the date of the order of this court in the writ petition in so far as the petitioners are concerned.
4. Both the writ petitioners were originally appointed through the Teachers Recruitment Board on contract basis as Lecturers under G.O.Ms.No.1042 dated 21.7.1990. The said contract was extended from time to time. The services were regularised on 2.5.1997. However, the period during which, they worked under contract basis was not taken into consideration for the purpose of service benefits.
5. Persons who were similarly placed and appointed on contract basis as that of the petitioners approached the Tribunal in O.A.No.925 of 2003 and obtained an order to the effect that the period served on contract basis should also be considered for the purpose of length of service for pension and other benefits. Based on the order of the Tribunal, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.514 Higher Education Department dated 14.5.2005 to those persons who approached the Administrative Tribunal. The two petitioners herein made a representation to the Government to extend the benefit as has been given to the other temporarily appointed persons who had the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.514 dated 14.5.2005 on the ground that the present petitioners also fall under the same category. The only difficulty, according to the respondents, is that the present writ petitioners did not approach the Tribunal for appropriate relief. The present writ petition has been filed since the representation on the above lines was not considered by the Government in the proper perspective.
6. Heard the learned Government Advocate, who stated that the representation if found on record will be considered by the Government. The petitioners may be directed to make a fresh representation along with a copy of this order for consideration by the appropriate authority.
7. In this case, the Government has extended the benefit to the similarly placed persons, viz., one Dhanasekaran and 14 others, who were also appointed as lecturers on contract basis and their services were regularised. By G.O.Ms.No.514 dated 14.5.2005, the period during which they served on contract basis was ordered to be counted for the purpose of pension. If the case of the two petitioners is similar to that of the persons, who got the benefit in G.O.Ms.No.514 dated 14.5.2005, there can be no impediment for the Government to consider the case of the petitioners on the same lines, if there is no other restraint in law.
8. Considering the above submissions, the petitioners are directed to make a proper representation enclosing relevant materials to the appropriate authority through the proper channel along with a copy of the order of this court. The representation shall be considered by the Government in accordance with law on its own merits within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. This writ petition is disposed off according. No order as to costs.
ts To
1.The Secretary to Government, Higher Educational Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2.The Directorate of Technical Education, Guindy, Chennai 25