The court established the applicability of G.O.Ms.No.408, Finance (Pension) Department dated 25.08.2009 to employees working on daily wages and directed the inclusion of 50% of the services for calculating pensionary benefits.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: PETITION filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent pertaining to his proceedings in No.R2/BMCA141/ 2010 dated 30.08.2010 and that of the 3rd respondent in P(1)/09381/Th.J.K./PUSM/HRS/OOTY/2018 dated 28.06.2018 and quash the orders dated 30.08.2010 and 28.06.2018 respectively and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to sanction pension and other retirement benefits of the petitioner by taking into consideration of his 7 years and 2 months of service under time scale of pay as well as 50% of his 20 years 3 months service in the Daily Wages category.)

1. This Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a Certiorarified mandamus seeking records of the second respondent, the Registrar, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University at Coimbatore in proceedings No. R2/BMCA141/ 2010 dated 30.08.2010 and of the 3rd respondent, The Comptroller, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore – 03 in P(1)/09381 /Th.J.K./PUSM/HRS/OOTY/2018 dated 28.06.2018 and quash both the orders and consequently direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to sanction pension and other retirement benefits of the petitioner by taking into consideration of his 7 years and 2 months of service under time scale of pay as well as 50% of his 20 years 3 months service in the Daily Wages category.

2. Primarily the petitioner places reliance on G.O.Ms.No.408, Finance (Pension) Department dated 25.08.2009. Even before proceeding further with the facts of the case, it is worthwhile to examine the import of G.O.Ms.No.408 dated 25.08.2009. That particular Government Order came to be passed consequent to the fact that several representations have been received stating the services rendered by the Government servants, who had been employed in non-provisionalised service/consolidated pay/ honorarium/daily wages, were not taken into consideration while their total number of years of service was calculated for pensionary benefits and other benefits.

3. It was also stated that the said Government servants under those four categories were continued to be employed in the same category and were not brought into regular service. In view of that particular complaint being made and understanding the practical situation, the Government had passed G.O.Ms.No.408 dated 25.08.2009.

4. By the said Government order, the employees in the aforementioned four categories, namely, non-provisionalised service/consolidated pay/honorarium/daily wages, were directed to be brought into regular service subject to certain conditions. This was the general import of G.O.Ms.No.408 dated 25.08.2009.

5. The petitioner herein had been appointed in the second respondent, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University at Coimbatore as Casual Mazdoor on daily wages on and from 08.12.1988. Even before examining the facts further, it would be evident that since he was originally employed as daily wages, G.O.Ms.No.408, referred to above, would be applicable to him, if he satisfies other conditions as stipulated in the said Government Order.

6. The petitioner had given various representations seeking regularisation of service and finally by an order of the second respondent dated 12.11.2009, the services of the petitioner were regularised and he was brought into regular time scale of pay in the pay band of Rs.2,500-5,000 with grade pay of Rs.500/- with effect from 01.04.2009. He was then designated as Mazdoor on time scale of pay. He was subsequently promoted as permanent unskilled Mazdoor and continued in the said post till 31.05.2016 when he retired upon attaining the age of superannuation.

7. The petitioner''s services had been fully engaged by the respondents in their Horticulture Research Station, Ooty, Research Farm at Nanjanadu, Ooty. He was also posted in the office of the Professor/Head Horticulture Research Station, Ooty to attend all clerical and administrative works.

8. The petitioner had then