The State Of Tamilnadu v. S.Revathy (Died)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.09.2025 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL and CMP.No.6380 of 2021
1. The State Of Tamilnadu Represented By Its Secretary To Government School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 9 2.The Director Of Government Examinations Directorate Of Government Examinations, College Road, Chennai - 600006 3.The Regional Deputy Director Of Government Examinations Directorate Of Government Examinations, College Road, Chennai-600006 ... Appellant Vs.
1. S.Revathy (died) No. 81 Elango Street, Parvathy Nagar, Old Perungalathur, Chennai600063 2.N.Ramachandran (husband) (legal Heir Of Deceased Respondent) 81, Elango St, Parvathy Nagar, Old Perungalathur, Ch 600063.
3.R.Sathya Priya (Legal heir of deceased respondent) R1 DIED. R2 and R3 are substituted for LRS of deceased R1 vide court order dated 17.09.2025 made in CMP.No.4560/2021 in WA.Sr.No.5145/2019 (WA.No.1014/2021) ... Respondents PRAYER: Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 11.04.2018 made in W.P.No.8616 of 2018. For Appellant : Mr.K.H.Ravi Kumar Government Advocate For Respondents : Mr.G.Elanchezhiyan for R2 & R3
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of this Court was delivered by M.S.RAMESH.J) This Writ Appeal has been filed to set aside the order dated 11.04.2018 made in W.P.No.8616 of 2018.
2. The legal ratio with regard to counting of 50% of the past services for the full-time employees, who were appointed prior to 01.04.2003, have been well settled by the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in the case of Government of Tamil Nadu and Others vs. R.Kaliyamoorthy, reported in [(2019) (6) CTC 705], which decision has been reiterated by several Coordinate Benches of this Court.
3. Applying the ratio in R.Kaliyamoorthy (supra), the learned Single Judge had disposed of the Writ Petition with a direction to the appellants herein to count 50% of the past services of the first respondent herein.
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
R.SAKTHIVEL , J.
Anu
4. We do not find any illegality or other infirmity in the impugned order of the Writ Court.
5.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [M.S.R., J] [R.S.V.,J] 24.09.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Anu and CMP.No.6380 of 2021