Stale claims for service and pensionary benefits, initiated after significant delay and laches, are not maintainable, and retrospective benefits under government orders are not applicable to employees who retired prior to the order's effective date.

PRAYER; The writ petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to reckon and take into account the petitioners continuous and uninterrupted service rendered from 1.7.1983 to 31.5.2006 ie. the period prior to regularisation along with the service rendered from 1.7.2006 till the date of retirement to recompute, revise and refix the petitioners retirement benefits by duly including the aforesaid continuous pre-regularization service, to disburse all consequential arrears arising out of such re computation of retirement benefits within a time frame For Petitioner(s): Mr.D.Prasanna Kumar For Respondent: Mr.T.M.Rajangam, GA

ORDER

The writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to reckon and take into account the petitioners continuous and uninterrupted service rendered from 1.7.1983 to 31.5.2006 ie. the period prior to regularisation along with the service rendered from 1.7.2006 till the date of retirement to recompute, revise and refix the petitioners retirement benefits by duly including the aforesaid continuous pre-regularization service, to disburse all consequential arrears arising out of such re computation of retirement benefits.

2. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on records.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner entered into service on 01.07.1983 as NMR/Daily Wage employee and worked continuously till regularisation on 01.07.2006. He retired on 31.05.2018. By G.O.(4D) No.20 dated 10.12.2018, similarly placed employees were granted benefit of past service. The petitioner’s representation dated 19.01.2026 was not considered. Hence, the present writ petition.

4. The learned Government Advocate submitted that the petitioner was regularised only with effect from 01.07.2006 pursuant to the order in WP.No.20340 of 2012 dated 30.07.2012. He retired on 31.05.2018. The claim for counting past service from 1983 is made for the first time by representation dated 19.01.2026 i.e. after lapse of seven years from retirement and 20 years from regularisation. Such a belated claim is hit by delay and laches. GO.4D No.20 dated 10.12.2018 applies only to those in service as on that date. The petitioner having retired on 31.05.2018 cannot claim benefit.

5. The facts are not disputed. The petitioner was regularised from service w.e.f. 01.07.2006 and retired on 31.05.2018. Pension was fixed counting service from 01.07.2006. The petitioner kept quiet for 7 years after retirement. Only on 19.01.2026 he made a representation seeking to count 23 years of pre-

regularisation service.

6. It is settled law that stale claim cannot be entertained on the ground of delay and laches. The petitioner having accepted regularisation from 01.07.2006 and pension based on that date, cannot turn around after seven years of retirement to claim additional benefits. Further, G.O.4D No.20 dated 10.12.2018, is applicable to employees who were in service on 10.12.2018. The petitioner retired on 31.05.2018 i.e. before the G.O. Therefore, the petitioner cannot claim parity.

7. The issue of counting NMR/daily wage service is governed by GO.Ms.No.408 Finance (pension) Department dated 25.08.2009, which provides for counting 50% of such service. However, the benefit must be claimed within a reasonable time. The petitioner has approached this Court 20 years after regularisation and 7 years after retirement. Therefore, the petitioner did not seek such relief at present.

8. In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition.

Accordingly the same is dismissed. No costs.