P.G.Masilamani v. State Of Tamil Nadu,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.12.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN 1.P.G.Masilamani 2.B.Renganathan 3.P.P.Mukundan 4.C.Padavettan 5.K.Palanisamy 6.K.Ramamoorthy 7.R.Iswaramurthy 8.J.Gnanaprakasam 9.K.Neelamegam 10.R.Rengasamy 11.R.Dwaraka Prasad 12.S.Subramanian 13.V.Narayanasamy 14.S.Sankararaj 15.S.Jebamoney 16.P.Ramakrishnan 17.K.Sakunthala 18.Thangammal 19.P.Mannagatti 20.M.Thiyagarajan Milton 21.M.Sundaramurthy 22.C.A.Lakshmi 23.K.G.Parasuraman 24.A.Sowrinathan 25.S.Ramakrishnan 26.P.Ganesan 27.S.Narayanan 28.S.Ramasamy 1/8
29.P.Vatsala Bai 30.C.Natarajan 31.A.Rajasekaran 32.S.Shanmugam 33.P.Ramasamy 34.M.Masimalai 35.G.Chandrasekara Gupta 36.V.M.Parvathi 37.N.Krishnamoorthy 38.K.Srinivasan 39.S.Lakshminarasimhan 40.V.Prakasam 41.C.S.Neelayadakshi 42.M.Kandasami 43.R.Gopalakrishnan 44.V.N.Ranganathan 45.T.Govindarajan 46.R.Vedagiri 47.E.Dandapani 48.R.Krishnaveni 49.S.Gurumurthi 50.K.Lakshmipathi 51.V.Andivelan 52.A.Salath Mary 53.S.Elangovan 54.V.K.Manickam 55.A.Anthoni Ammal 56.P.Kannaiyan 57.R.Chinnaswamy 58.K.Chandrasekaran 59.A.S.Balakrishnan 60.G.Thamburaj 61.C.Chellappan 62.M.Subramanian 63.M.Subramanian 64.K.Natesan 65.K.Kavathal 66.M.Narayanan 2/8
67.P.Gomathinayagam 68.K.Raju 69.N.Harihara Subramanian 70.S.Munirathinam 71.S.S.Kandasamy 72.V.Krishna Sharma 73.N.M.Raman 74.P.Rangan 75.M.M.Raman 76.J.Raman 77.A.T.Sakkolai 78.B.Nagulan 79.S.T.Raju 80.T.Nanjan 81.S.Rangan 82.K.B.Bojan 83.K.K.Raman 84.M.Santhamani 85.B.M.Bellie 86.G.S.Nanjan 87.K.Halan 88.K.Raman 89.S.M.Raman 90.K.R.Nanjan ...
Petitioners versus 1.State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary to the Government, Finance (PGC) Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Principal Accountant General (A&E), 361, Anna Salai, Teynampet, 3/8
Chennai - 600 018.
3.The Commissioner of Treasuries and Accounts, Panagal Buildings, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 018.
...
Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Declaration, declaring the clarification letter issued by the first respondent in Letter No.61495 (Ms.)/PGC/2013 Finance (PGC) Department dated 04.02.2014 and its allied Letter No.24056/ PGC/2014-1 Finance (PGC) Department dated 28.05.2014 as null and void and unenforceable in the eye of law, further the second respondent has not raised any doubt from the first respondent through the letter Pen 30/176/2013-14/96083 dated 23.10.2013 as stated by the first respondent in the clarification letter dated 04.02.
2014 and thereby direct the first respondent to issue orders for the payment of arrears of Dearness Allowance for the difference of the pre-revised pension minus original pension from the date of retirement to till date as the Dearness Allowance/pay is one of the many components, which go into the eventual determination of pension as specifically indicated by the Apex Court in paragraph 30 of its judgment dated 17.01.2013 and direct the first respondent to issue instructions to the third respondent to revise the pension automatically as per G.O.174 dated 21.04.1998 and G.O.235 dated 1.6.2009 as already ordered in paragraph 15 of G.O.363 dated 23.8.2013 as far as the petitioners are concern and pay the consequential arrears within a stipulated period.
Mr.A.R.Nixon 4/8
For Respondents :
Mrs.V.Yamuna Devi Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, it is represented by Mr.A.R.Nixon, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mrs.V.Yamuna Devi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents that similar batch of Writ Petitions were already dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court and the same was also confirmed in W.A.Nos.2712, 2713 and 1518 of 2021 by a common judgment dated 13.06.2024. A copy of the said judgment passed by the learned Division Bench is also placed before this Court, wherein the learned Division Bench observed as under:- "3. ...
The grievances of the Writ petitioners are that the said Government order has not been implemented properly. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants would vehemently contend that the benefits extended under G.O. Ms. No.363 Finance (PGC) department dated 23.08.2013 is not proper and the authorities have not extended the benefits as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The calculations made by the Pay and Accounts Office and the respective Treasuries are not in accordance with the Government order passed to implement the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. We cannot re-adjudicate the issues already decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.. The issues are related to the retired employees, who retired from service in between 01.06.1988 and 31.12.1995. The Government Order in G.O. Ms. No.363 was issued in the year 2013 and 5/8
thereafter, the revision of the pension was made pursuant to further pay Commissions also.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances, the order passed implementing the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India cannot be interfered with by this Court and more so, the Hon'ble Supreme Court's order has been implemented by the Government and if at all any error committed by the Treasury officers or Pay and Accounts Office in calculating the benefits, it is for the aggrieved individual pensioners to approach the Treasury officer or Pay & Accounts Officer concerned for necessary clarifications or to verify the correctness of the fixation made with reference to the Government Order issued in G.O. Ms. No.363 Finance (PGC) department dated 23.08.2013. Therefore, the relief as such sought for in the Writ petitions and Writ appeals cannot be granted by this Court and consequently all the Writ appeals are disposed of. It is needless to state that the fixation of pension or revision of pension made in accordance with the pay rules and Government orders in force, need not be reduced." 2.
In the light of the above, this Writ Petition is also disposed of in terms of the above order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court. 3.
There shall be no order as to costs.
09.12.2024 Speaking order / Non-speaking order Index : Yes / No : Yes / No sri To 1.The Principal Secretary, 6/8
Government of Tamil Nadu, Finance (PGC) Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Principal Accountant General (A&E), 361, Anna Salai, Teynampet, Chennai - 600 018.
3.The Commissioner of Treasuries and Accounts, Panagal Buildings, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 018.
7/8
G.ARUL MURUGAN , J.
sri 09.12.2024 8/8