The date of approval of appointment cannot be construed as the relevant date for considering the applicability of the pension scheme, and it is the original date of appointment that matters for determining the applicability of the old pension scheme.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent vide Mu.Mu.No.092127/D2/E3/2014 dated 03.08.2015 by confirming the order of the 4th respondent, vide Na.Ka.No.4758/A3/2014 dated 24.03.2015, and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner w.e.f. 19.06.2002 as Middle Grade Assistant as per G.O.Ms.No.79 dated 14.06.2002, with all consequential benefits in the light of judgment passed in W.P(MD),No.1654/2015 dated 02.11.2006, and by counting the past service from 19.06.2002 to 31.05.2006, for the purpose of old pension in the light of the order passed in W.A.(MD).No.307/2019 dated 02.08.2019 reported in 2019(4) CTC 865. (Prayer amended vide order dt.19.12.2022 ade in WMP.No. 33419/2022 in W.P.No.40722/2015)

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 03.08.2015 by confirming the order of the 4th respondent dated 24.03.2015, rejecting to approve the appointment of the petitioner with effect from 19.06.2002 as Middle Grade Graduate Assistant and consequently direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner w.e.f. 19.06.2002 as Middle Grade Assistant as per G.O.Ms.No.79 dated 14.06.2002, with all consequential benefits in the light of judgment passed in W.P(MD),No.1654/2015 dated 02.11.2006, and by counting the past service from 19.06.2002 to 31.05.2006, for the purpose of old pension in the light of the order passed in W.A.(MD).No.307/2019 dated 02.08.2019 reported in 2019(4) CTC 865.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the leaned Special Government Pleader appearing for the 1st to 4th respondents.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the 5th respondent School is an Aided Religious Minority Institution, in which, a vacancy arose for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher, due to the order of dismissal of one Tmt.C.Shanthi on 31.10.2000. In the said vacancy, the 5th respondent Management, selected and appointed the petitioner vide order dated 19.11.2000 and submitted proposal for approval to the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent did not approve the appointment of the petitioner on the ground that C.Shanthi, who was dismissed by the 5th respondent School Management, filed a writ petition challenging her order of dismissal. The said writ petition was dismissed by order dated 30.04.2002. In the meanwhile, the Government of Tamil Nadu issued G.O.(Ms.)No.79, dated 14.06.2002, upgrading the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in the Middle/ High School and directed the Aided Schools to appoint B.Ed., qualified Teachers as B.T.Assistants, in the secondary grade vacancies arising on or after 1.6.2002. Hence, the 5th respondent School issued order of reappointment to the petitioner as B.T.Assistant on 19.06.2002 as per the said G.O.Ms.No.79 and submitted a proposal dated 21.03.2003 for approval of appointment of the petitioner with effect from 19.06.2002. When the said proposal is pending, the Government issued another Government Order in G.O.(Ms.)No.125 dated 12.11.2003 downgrading the post of B.T. Assistant Teacher, as Junior B.T., on consolidated pay of Rs.4000/- only for the vacancies arising on or after 01.06.2003. The 4th respondent instead of approving the petitioner''s appointment as B.T.Assistant as per G.O.Ms.No.79 with effect from the date of his initial appointment, passed an order approving the appointment as Junior B.T., w.e.f. 01.06.2003 on consolidated pay vide proceedings dated 02.06.2006 as per G.O.(Ms)No.125 dated 12.11.2003. Thus, the petitioner was denied Old Pension Scheme. The petitioner sent representation dated 7.11.2014 to the 2nd respondent for approval of appointment w.e.f 19.6.2002 as B.T. Assistant with all consequential benefits as per G.O.Ms.79. The 3rd respondent also recommended and forwarded proposal on 04.01.2015 to th