The application of Rule 11(2) of the Pension Rules and subsequent government orders in determining pensionary benefits for part-time Panchayat Clerks.

JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Pen 3/PPT 6325/13-14/180/106/87 dated Nil.11.2013, quash the same and consequently direct the 5th respondent to count 50% of service of the petitioner as part-time Panchayat Clerk from 05.01.1980 to 01.01.1991 and Panchayat Assistant from 01.01.1991 to 15.11.1999 for the purpose of pension and other retirement benefits.)

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 05.01.1980 on consolidated pay. On 01.01.1991, 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 01.07.2002 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 30.04.2010.

3. The petitioner states that the respondents have not counted the services rendered by him as part-time Panchayat Clerk from 05.01.1980 to 01.01.1991 and as Panchayat Assistant from 01.01.1991 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.

4. The respondents have contended that the petitioner was initially appointed as part-time Clerk for Vayalathur, Suruttal and Ezhacheri Villages in Vembakkam Panchayat Union, as per proceedings dated 05.05.1980 of the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, Vembakkam. It is stated that the said post was not a full time job, but a part-time job. The Government Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.962, Rural Development (E-7) Department, dated 26.11.1990, directed that the existing system of part-time Clerks attending groups of Village Panchayats be reorganized and the Panchayat Assistants be appointed by creation of one post of Panchayat Assistant for each of the Village Panchayats having population of more than 1500 each, with effect from 01.01.1991. It was further directed that in respect of Village Panchayats having less than population of 1500, two or three such adjacent Village Panchayats may be grouped together and one Panchayat Assistant may be posted for that group of smaller Panchayats. The Government further ordered that the Panchayat Assistant will be paid a consolidated amount of Rs.400/- each as a consolidated Honorarium per mensum and the existing part-time Clerks will be appointed as Panchayat Assistants against the posts sanctioned above in any of the Panchayats. Accordingly, the petitioner was appointed as Panchayat Assistant for Mangal and Mathur Village Panchayats, vide proceedings dated 29.12.1990.

5. It was further stated that the petitioner was promoted as Junior Assistant with effect from 15.11.1999 and as Assistant with effect from 31.12.2004 and he had retired from service on 30.04.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation. Thus, the pensionary benefits of the petitioner were sanctioned by the fifth respondent by taking into account the service rendered by him