S.Rajamani v. The Secretary To The Government

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 08.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA S. Rajamani .... Petitioner W.P. No.24479 of 2025 S. Pushparaj .... Petitioner W.P. No.24625 of 2025 vs.

1. The Secretary to the Government Revenue and Disaster Management Department St George Fort, Secretariat Chennai-600 009.

2. The Commissioner of Revenue Administration Commissionerate of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

3. The District Collector, Villupuram District Villupuram.

4. The Tahsildar Dindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District.

...

Respondents in both W.P.s Common Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of 1/6

India to issue Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to count 50% of the service rendered by the petitioners in the permanent vacancy as Village Assistant prior to 01.06.1995 along with regular service rendered by the petitioners from 01.06.1995 as qualifying service for the purpose of calculation of pension and other retirement benefits and to revise and refix the pension and other retirement benefits of the petitioner within a reasonable time in the light of the order passed by the Madurai Bench of this Hon'ble Court in W.P. (MD). No. 17326 of 2020 dated 04.12.2020 which was confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.(MD) No.2165 of 2021 by order dated 10.12 2021 and by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C)D.26383 of 2024 by order dated 22.07.2022. In both W.P.s For petitioner : Mr.V.S. Jagadeesan For respondents: Mr.V.

Jeevagiridharan Additional Government Pleader - - - - - - COMMON ORDER These writ petitions have been filed for a Mandamus seeking direction to the 1st respondent to count 50% of the service rendered by the petitioners in the permanent vacancy as Village Assistant prior to 01.06.1995 along with regular service rendered by the petitioners from 01.06.

Hon'ble Court in W.P. (MD). No. 17326 of 2020 dated 04.12.2020 which was confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.(MD) No.2165 of 2021 by order dated 10.12.2021 and by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C)D.26383 of 2024 by order dated 22.07.2022.

2. It is the case of the petitioners that they were appointed as Village Assistants on temporary basis and subsequently they were absorbed in regular time scale of pay as per G.O. Ms. No.625, dated 06.07.1995. Later, they were promoted as Village Administrative Officer and on attaining the age of superannuation, they were permitted to retire from service. It is their further case that even though they served as Village Assistant without any break till their date of retirement, while calculating qualifying service for pensionary purposes, their past services were not taken into account. In such circumstances, they submitted representations to the 1st respondent requesting to count their contingency service as Village Assistant prior to 01.06.1995 as well as their regular service after 01.06.1995 for the purpose of calculation of pension and other retirement benefits. But the said representations have not been considered by the respondents and therefore, these writ petitions have been filed with the aforesaid prayer.

3/6

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits it would suffice, if a direction is issued by this Court to consider the petitioners' representations in the light of the order passed by this Court in W.P. (MD). No. 17326 of 2020 dated 04.12.2020 which was confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.(MD) No.2165 of 2021, vide order dated 10.12 2021 and upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP(C)D.26383 of 2024 by order dated 22.07.2022, within a time frame.

4. Reiterating the contents of the counter affidavit filed by the 4th respondent, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that services rendered by the petitioners prior to 01.06.1995 were on part time basis and hence, it could not be counted for the purpose of calculating pension. However, he submitted that the petitioners representations have not been received by the respondents and on submission of copies of such representations by the petitioners, the respondents will consider the same in the light of the judgments, as stated supra. Therefore, this Court may issue suitable directions, accordingly.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

4/6

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the petitioners to submit copies of the earlier representations sent by them to the respondents, forthwith and on such receipt, the 1st respondent shall consider the petitioners representations in the light of the judgments as stated supra and pass orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any view on the merits of the case.

7. With the aforesaid directions, these writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

08.09.2025 Index: Yes/ No Internet : Yes / No Speaking order / Non speaking order vsi2 To

1. The Secretary to the Government Revenue and Disaster Management Department St George Fort, Secretariat Chennai-600 009.

5/6

A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

vsi2

2. The Commissioner of Revenue Administration Commissionerate of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

3. The District Collector, Villupuram District Villupuram.

4. The Tahsildar Dindivanam Taluk, Villupuram District.

08.09.2025 6/6