Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
G. Veerabathiran – Appellant
Versus
Principal Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayats Department, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to count the service rendered by the petitioner in the post of Panchayat Clerk/ Panchayat Assistant from 1.11.1981 to 2.6.2005 along with the service rendered in the post of Junior Assistant and RWO – I from 3.6.2005 to 30.6.2014 and grant him pension and other retirement benefits.)
1. The relief sought for in the present Writ Petition is to direct the respondents to count the service rendered by the petitioner in the post of Panchayat Clerk/Panchayat Assistant from 01.11.1981 to 02.06.2005 along with the regular service rendered by him in the post of Junior Assistant and Rural Welfare Officer – I from 03.06.2005 to 30.06.2014.
2. The petitioner was appointed as part-time Panchayat Clerk on 01.11.1981 and full time Panchayat Assistant on 28.11.1990 in Tirupporur Panchayat Union. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant on 03.06.2005 and promoted to the post of the Rural Welfare Officer in the cadre of Assistant on 15.05.2013. The petitioner was allowed to retire from service as Rural Welfare Officer-I on 30.06.2014, on
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to follow the Pension Rules scrupulously for counting 50% of the services rendered by employees and the application of Article 14 only if ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Rule 11(4) of the Pension Rules in the context of part-time employment and the eligibility for pensionary benefits.
The application of Rule 11(2) of the Pension Rules and subsequent government orders in determining pensionary benefits for part-time Panchayat Clerks.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that Rule 11 and Rule 11(4) of the Pension Rules are to be followed scrupulously for the purpose of counting 50% of the services rendered by the em....
Article 14 of the Constitution is not meant to perpetuate illegality or fraud, and if an illegality or irregularity has been committed in favor of any individual or a group of individuals, others can....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to follow Rule 11(2) of the Pension Rules and the Full Bench Judgement in determining the eligibility for pensionary benefits.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to count service rendered as Part Time Panchayat Assistant for grant of pension, as governed by G.O.Ms.No.99, G.O.Ms.No.77, and Rul....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the phrase 'job involving whole time employment' in Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules should be interpreted broadly to include part-t....
Appointment conditions are binding, and part-time employees are not eligible for the benefit of full-time employees as per Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
