SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41542

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J
P.Murugesan – Appellant
Versus
The Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department – Respondent
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.S.Visvalingam
For the Respondents: Mr.S.Shaji Bino Special Government Pleader

Service as Village Assistant after regularisation shall be counted for pensionary benefits as per G.O.(Perm) No.625.

Headnote:The first paragraph examines the Tamil Nadu Village Assistant Pension Rules. It finds the petitioner served as Thalayari and Village Assistant from 1991 until retirement on 30.04.2020, and the respondents were directed to count prior service for pensionary benefits. The court observed that the Division Bench order confirmed eligibility for such benefits. The second paragraph identifies whether a writ petition can require counting Village Assistant service for pension. The ratio decidendi holds that service rendered prior to regularisation must be counted for pensionary benefits. The last paragraph results in the respondents submitting a revised pension proposal within six weeks.

Table of Content
1. case admitted and consented for early disposal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. detailed service history presented with pension claim requested. (Para 3)
3. division bench order relied upon for counting service. (Para 4)
4. respondents agree to follow precedent. (Para 5)
5. direction issued for revised pension proposal within six weeks. (Para 6)

O R D E R

Heard Mr.S.Visvalingam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.Shaji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

2. With the consent of both sides, this Writ Petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was initially appointed as Thalayari and served as such from 30.09.1991 to 31.05.1995. Thereafter, he was absorbed in the regular time scale of pay as Village Assistant with effect from 01.06.1995 in terms of G.O.(Perm) No.625, Revenue Department, dated 06.07.1995 and continued as such till 04.03.2019. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Office Assistant through proceedings dated 28.02.2019. Subsequently, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation and retired from service on 30.04.2020. However, the services rendered by the petitioner as Village Assistant from 01.06.1995 to 04.03.2019 and as Office Assistant from 04.03.2019 to 30.04.2020 were not taken into consideration while fixing his pension. Hence, the petitioner claims to have submitted a representation requesting revision of his pension duly taking into consideration the services rendered by him as Village Assistant and Office Assistant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the very same issue of counting the services rendered as Village Assistant and Office Assistant for the purpose of pensionary benefits had fallen for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD) No.1200 of 2025 etc. [The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department and others Vs. K. Marimuthu and others]. The Division Bench of this Court, by an order dated 03.02.2026, held that the Village Assistants and Office Assistants whose services were regularised in terms of G.O.(Perm) No.625, Revenue Department, dated 06.07.1995 are entitled to count their entire service as Village Assistant and Office Assistant for the purpose of pensionary benefits.

5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents fairly submits that the claim made by the petitioner is covered by the order of the Division Bench of this Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner and further submits that the representation submitted by the petitioner would be considered by the respondents in accordance with law and that an appropriate revised proposal would be submitted.

6. In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the third respondent to submit a revised pension proposal to the first respondent, duly taking into consideration the services rendered by the petitioner as Village Assistant and Office Assistant, based on the petitioner’s representation dated 21.03.2026, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top