The court directed the respondents to grant 5% Personal Pay to the petitioner and consequently release revised pensionary benefits based on the submission made by the respondent's counsel.

Prayer: This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of 1st respondent pertaining to the communication in Pen2/1/Pt 15825/Pt 15866 dated 09.11.2022 and to quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to grant one increment to the petitioner for promotion for the post of Copyist to Typist that the post of Typist is Promotive post from the post of Copyist as per G.O.Ms.No.903 Home (Courts V) Department dated 09.08.1994 and G.O.Ms.No.1006 Home (Courts V) Department dated 3.7.2007 with proceedings of High Court, Madras in Order Roc.NO. 3004/94/G2, dated 06.08.2007 and Letter No.48211/Pay Cell/2012-1, dated 09.10.2012 and also to grant 5% Personal Pay to the petitioner as per Government Letter No. 33730/CMPC/2011-1 dt. 19.07.2011 which was issued based on the order of the High Court dated 01.03.2011 in W.P. (MD)Nos. 9459, 9460 of 2010 and 1414 of 2011.

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.DHANDAPANI.J)

This writ petition has been filed challenging the communication of the first respondent in Pen2/1/Pt 15825/Pt 15866 dated 09.11.2022 and for a consequential direction to the first respondent to grant one increment to the petitioner for promotion to the post of Copyist to Typist.

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner appointed as a Copyist on 01.03.2000 and later retired as Head Clerk, Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Thoothukudi, on 30.06.2022. The petitioner has made a representation with the first respondent claiming 5% Personal Pay and one increment applicable for the post of Copyists to Typists under the relevant Government Orders and proceedings. However, the first respondent, by communication dated 09.11.2022, rejected the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the benefit was available only to employees who had joined before the specified dates in 1992/1998, whereas the petitioner joined service only in 2000. The petitioner therefore challenges the said communication under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking its quashing and consequential grant of 5% Personal Pay and one increment.

3.The learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that 5% of Personal Pay alone will be provided under the relevant Government Orders and proceedings as sought for by the petitioner, expeditiously.

4.Recording the submission of the learned counsel for the first respondent, this Writ Petition stands disposed of by directing the respondents to grant 5% Personal Pay to the petitioner, as claimed, and consequently release the revised pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner, accordingly, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.