IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 17.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN and W.M.P.No.49092 of 2025 A.Karuppannan ... Petitioner -Vs-

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department (Transport – II), Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

2.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home (Tr.IIA) Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 9.

3.The Transport Commissioner, Commissionerate of Transport and Road Safety, Annasalai, Guindy, Chennai – 32. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for records with respect of the impugned proceedings in Letter No.83048/Tr. II-A/2018-6 dated 24.10.2025 issued by the 2^nd respondent and quash the same, consequently direct the respondents 1 and 2 to grant of pensionary benefits, superannuation pension and other service benefits including gratuity infavour of the petitioner on retirement from the post of Regional Transport Officer as on 31.05.2016, by reckoning the period of service rendered in Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Salem (formerly known as Anna Transport Corporation) from 01.08.1985 to 12.05.1998 (14 years and 9 months) and consequently settle the revised pensionary benefits including the regular pension and the arrears of retirement benefits in the light of order passed by the 1^st respondent dated 24.06.2024 in GO.(D) No.799 Home (Transport-IIA) Department along with interest at the rate of 12 % per annum.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Nalliyappan For Respondents : Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan, Additional Government Pleader *****

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the 2^nd respondent dated 24.10.2025, thereby rejecting the request made by the petitioner to count his past service rendered in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Salem along with the present Government service.

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

3. The petitioner was initially appointed as Diploma Trainee in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited, Salem. Subsequently, he was regularised and promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer. After period of several years, the petitioner had applied for selection to the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector Grade-II. He got selected and he was relieved from Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited and he joined duty in the post of Motor Vehicle Inspector Grade-II. After attainment of superannuation, the petitioner got retired. However, the petitioner's past service was not taken into consideration for his retirement benefits. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents. However, it was rejected by way of the impugned order on the ground that the Rule does not permit to count the past service rendered in Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited along with the present Government service.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that similarly placed persons were granted relief by taking into account their past services. He also produced the order before this Court.

5. It is seen that some of the similarly placed persons' past services in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Limited were considered as qualifying service for pensionary benefits subject to the condition that pension and provident fund contribution, if any received by the individual for the past service, shall be remitted by the individual along with interest till date to the Government account.

6. In view of the above, the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent, dated 24.10.2025 is set aside and the aforesaid request made by the petitioner is remanded back to the 2^nd respondent. The 2^nd respondent is directed to pass fresh orders, in the light of the order passed for the