IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

1.R.Ravikumar

2.A.Shanmugam

3.A.Fazuluddin 4.R.Sundaresan

5.C.Logaiya

6.P.John Britto

7.S.Jameelammal ….. Petitioners

Vs

1.The Secretary to Government,

Housing and Urban Development Department,

Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Managing Director,

Tamil Nadu Housing Board,

CMDA Complex, E & C Market Road,

Koyambedu, Chennai-600 107. … Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to calculate the petitioners pension by taking note of 50% services rendered as temporary employee till the petitioners regularization and disburse by calculating the same from their retirement date together with arrears by taking note of order passed in W.P.No.11746 of 2014, dated 03.11.2017 confirmed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in W.A.No.1857 of 2022,

dated 16.08.2022.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam For Respondents : Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed for direction directing the respondents to calculate the petitioners' pension by taking note of 50% services rendered as temporary employee till the petitioners'

regularization.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3. The petitioners were appointed as Nominal Muster Roll Employees in the Tamil Nadu Housing Board, during the year 1979- 1988. During such period, they were disbursed as non-provincialized service, consolidated pay, honorarium or daily wages and subsequently, in the year 1988, their services has been regularized by way of fixing time scale as per Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.400, Housing and Urban DevelopmentDepartment, dated 02.05.1990 by giving retrospective effect from the year 1988, i.e., on 07.12.1988. Thereafter, the petitioners retired from service. However, their 50% of service were not taken into account for their pension.

4. Therefore, similarly placed persons approached this Court in W.P.No.11746 of 2014. This Court, by an order dated 03.11.2017, held as follows :-

5. The grievances advanced in this writ petition is the non-consideration of the amended Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, in respect of qualifying the services and the amended Rule is extracted hereunder:

QUALIFYING SERVICE

1."Commencement of qualifying service # {(1}) Subject to the provisions of these rules, qualifying service of a Government servant shall commence from the date he taken charge of the post to which he is first appointed either substantively or in an officiating or temporary capacity. In the case of a Government servant retiring on or after the 1st October. 1969,2{.....} temporary or officiating service in a pensionable post whether rendered in a regular capacity or not shall count in full as qualifying service even it is not followed by confirmation.

(2) Half of the service paid from contingencies shall be allowed to count towards qualifying service for pension along with regular service subject to the following conditions: service paid from contingencies shall be in a job involving whole time employment and not part time for a portion of the day.

● Service paid from contingencies shall be in a type of work or job for which regular posts could have been sanctioned, for example Chowkidar.

● Service shall be for which the payment is made out on monthly or daily rates computed and paid on a monthly basis and which, though not analogous to the regular scale of pay, shall bear some relation in the matter of pay to those being paid for similar jobs being performed by staff in regular establishments.

● Service paid from contingencies shall be continuous and followed by absorption in regular employment without a break.

● Subject to the above conditions being fulfilled, the weightage for past service paid from contigencies shall be limited to the period after the 1^st January 1961 for which authe