Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
K. Elangovan – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner, Commissionerate of Social Welfare, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records of the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Roc No.50222/ N.M.P-1/ 2013 dated 20.06.2014 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to count the 50% services of the petitioner rendered as Noon Meal Organizer along with his regular service as VAO and to grant pension with arrears arising thereof and other retirement benefits.)
1. The order of rejection, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner to count 50% of the service rendered by him in the post of Noon Meal Organiser for the purpose of pensionary benefits is under challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The writ petitioner was initially appointed as Noon Meal Organiser on 16.05.1984. The petitioner was working in the full time job as a Noon Meal Organiser and was a regular employee. The petitioner served about 16 years, 6 months and 15 days until he was selected to the post of Village Administrative Officer (VAO) and relieved from the post of Noon Meal Organiser on 30.11.2000. On such relieving, the petitioner joined in the post of Vill
Resignation from a service does not entail forfeiture of past service if it has been submitted to take up another appointment with proper permission under the government where service qualifies.
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 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....
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....
Resignation without proper permission under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules forfeits past service, and delay in claiming benefits undermines entitlement.
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 central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of fair and reasonable consideration of claims for pensionary benefits, especially in cases where employees have rendered service....
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
