Back
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR
R. Ponnappan – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.
Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling the records of the second respondent i.e. the Director of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Chennai relating to e.f. viz. 38631/2020, 07.12.2020 communicated by the fifth respondent i.e. the Commissioner, Melpuram Panchayat Union in Endorsement No. A1/3147/2019 dated 11.12.2020 and quash the same and consequently direct the first and second respondents i.e. the Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai and the Director of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Chennai to sanction pension under Old Pension Scheme counting 50% of services put in by the petitioner on daily wage i.e. from 10.11.1979 to 14.06.1992 and condoning the break period of 4 years and 11 months and 28 days along with regular service put in by him from 17.06.1992 to 31.05.2011 within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court.
1. This writ petition has been filed aggrieved by the proceedings in Pro. No. 38631/2020/E1, dated 07.12.2020 issued by Respondent No. 2 rejecting the proposal submitted by Respondent N
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....
The court established that 50% of daily wage service should be considered for pension calculation, as per previous judgments.
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 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 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....
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.
Court directed authority to consider petitioner's representation regarding counting temporary service toward pension calculation as per government order.
Employees whose temporary service was regularized prior to 01.04.2003 are entitled to have 50% of such temporary service counted as qualifying service for the purpose of pensionary benefits under the....
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.
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
