C.Ruthramoorthy v. M/S.State Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.12.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI
1. C.Ruthramoorthy 2.K. Rajendran 3.V. Ramar 4.K. Radha Petitioners Vs
1. M/s.State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Secretary, Animal Husbandry Department, Fort Street, George, Chennai District - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner and Director of Animal Husbandry, D.M.S. Compound, Chennai - 600 006 Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to consider the representations submitted by the petitioners dated 24.02.2023 for full pension and counting service, for which acknowledgement is also produced in the typed set of papers in the appeal of the High Court Order W.A. No 302 of 2008.
1/6
For petitioners : Mr. K.M. Ramesh Senior Counsel for Mr.R. Raja Karthikeyan For respondents : Mr.P. Ganesan Addl. Govt. Pleader
ORDER
Mr.P. Ganesan, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for respondents. With the consent of both the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal today at the stage of admission itself.
2. The petitioners seek a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider and dispose of their representation dated 24.02.2023, requesting that the service rendered by them in the Tamil Nadu Poultry Development Corporation Limited (TAPCO) be counted as pensionable service. The petitioners have expressed their willingness to remit the gratuity and employer's contribution towards EPF received from TAPCO, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.86, Animal Husbandry and Fisheries (FS-V) Department, dated 14.08.2013.
3. Further, it is averred that TAPCO was ordered to be closed due to sustained financial losses, pursuant to the recommendations of an Expert Committee, resulting in the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.86 dated 19.04.1999, which 2/6
provided for transfer of certain staff to the Animal Husbandry Department and retrenchment/voluntary retirement of others. Earlier, the said G.O. was challenged, and this Court, partly allowed the challenge, directing adoption of a fair procedure for absorption of employees. Consequently, G.O.(Ms.) No.91 dated 06.06.2000 was issued, transferring 139 posts to the Department of Animal Husbandry, with the transferred employees being treated as Government servants from the date of joining therein. Several representations seeking pensionary benefits by reckoning TAPCO service were initially rejected. However, in W.P.(MD) No.10296 of 2006, this Court, allowed the claim of one such employee, and the said decision was affirmed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD) No.302 of 2008 dated 18.07.2008, directing application of G.O.Ms.No.
86 dated 14.08.2003, subject to remittance of gratuity and EPF benefits. The said judgment has been implemented in the case of similarly placed employees, viz., Mr. B. Subramanian, Thiru. S.C. Duraisamy, and Mr. M. Karunanithi, pursuant to subsequent writ proceedings.
4. It is the grievance of the Petitioners that they are identically placed and their claim is squarely covered by the Division Bench judgment in W.A. (MD) No.302 of 2008. Despite having complied with the conditions under G.O.Ms.No.86 and submitting a detailed representation dated 24.02.2023, the respondents have failed to take any action. Hence, the instant writ petition 3/6
seeking appropriate directions for consideration and grant of pensionary benefits by counting the Petitioners' TAPCO service.
5. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and perused the materials placed on record.
6. Learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the representation of the petitioners will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with law.
7. Having regard to the fact that the petitioners seek only a limited relief of consideration of their representation and considering that the issue raised by the Petitioners is stated to be covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD) No.302 of 2008 dated 18.07.2008, this Court is of the view that no prejudice would be caused to the respondents, if a direction is issued to consider the representation of the petitioners.
8. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim made by the petitioners, this Court directs the 1st respondent to 4/6
consider and dispose of the petitioners' representation dated 24.02.2023, on its own merits and in accordance with law, in line with the directions issued by this Court in W.A.(MD) No.302 of 2008 dated 18.07.2008 and the subsequent orders passed in similar cases, if it is applicable to petitioners' case and pass appropriate orders, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. The writ petition stands disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
15.12.2025 (2/2) Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order vsi2 To
1. The Secretary, M/s.State of Tamil Nadu Animal Husbandry Department, Fort St., George, Chennai District - 600 009.
2.The Commissioner and Director of Animal Husbandry, D.M.S. Compound, Chennai - 600 006.
5/6
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
vsi2 15.12.2025 (2/2) 6/6