K.Mariappan v. Tamilnadu Generation And Distribution Corporation Ltd.,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.12.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.(MD)Nos.4348 and 3881 of 2020 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.3655 and 3272 of 2020 W.P.(MD)No.4348 of 2020

1. K.Mariappan

2. T.Packiyarajan

3. M.Ganesan

4. K.J.Balakrishnan

5. S.Ayyar ... Petitioners Vs.

1. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), (formerly TNEB), Rep by its Chairman / Director, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB), Presently Known as Tamil Nadu, Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, (TANGEDCO), Represented by its Secretary, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

... Respondents

PRAYER : Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in (Per) B.P.(Ch) No.235, dated 01.12.2009 on the file of the respondent No.2 in so far as excluding the merger of dearness relief of 50% from the pension of the petitioners in Clause 2 (e) and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the respondents to re-fix the pension of the petitioners, who have retired from service from 01.01.2006 to 30.11.2007 on par with State Government Employees by way of granting fitment weightage @ 40% of the Basic Pension of the petitioners including the effect of merger of 50% dearness allowance along with arrears and all other consequential benefits within the period stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioners :

Mr. T.Lajapathy Roy For Respondents :

Mrs. M.Parameswari Standing Counsel W.P.(MD)No.3881 of 2020

1. V.Vellaiappan

2. R.Kasturi

3. K.Murugesan

4. P.Ngappan

5. V.Palanisamy

6. N.Gopal

7. P.Ramasamy

8. M.Saminathan

9. A.Marathamuthu

10. C.Lakshmanan

11. V.Kannan

12. P.Rengasamy

13. A.Subramanianm

14. A.Iruthayaraj

15. N.Chandrasamy

16. U.Pitchai

17. V.Krishnan

18. K.Marappan

19. S.Periyannan

20. S.Subramanan

21. N.Desikachari

22. A.Raman

23. R.Ramasamy

24. S.K.Saravanan

25. M.Josephin

26. M.Nagararajan

27. K.Gopal Krishnan

28. P.R.Ragunathan

29. M.Dhakshnamoorthy

30. R.Karuppaiah

31. M.Mani

32. P.Arumugasamy

33. S.Padalingam

34. A.Moamad Masharudeen

35. J.Santhanam

36. R.Narasimalu

37. A.Patchamalai

38. V.Ilangovan

39. R.Mothilal

40. S.Ayyanar

41. M.Karrupa Pillai

42. R.Sundararaj

43. S.Karthikeyan

44. E.Annakamu

45. S.Syed Abdul Subakhan

46. V.Subbaian

47. K.Rajappan

48. T.K.Subramanian

49. A.Ramadoss

50. P.Govindan

51. A.N.Marappan

52. P.Govindan Kutty

53. A.Sundaram

54. K.R.Chinnasamy

55. Vasthu K.Krishna

56. C.Ramasamy

57. K.Sugumaran

58. M.P.Iyyadurai

59. B.Subramanian

60. S.Subramanian

61. Mrs.K.Prema

62. Mrs.D.Padmavathi

63. C.Paramandam

64. G.Gandhi

65. B.Govindaraj

66. S.Kannappan

67. R.Rajaram

68. A.Shek Sulaiman

69. R.Venugopal

70. S.Jaganathan

71. J.Rajamani Pillai

72. K.Ramachandran

73. N.Kadar Basha

74. Mrs.K.Chellammal

75. A.Chinnasamy

76. Mrs.M.Mallika

77. Mrs.R.Mariathal

78. Mrs.Bemmuthai

79. Mrs. M.Dhanapackiyam

80. C.Palaniappan

81. S.K.Aruchami

82. K.Kaliyappan

83. Mrs.S.Mallammal

84. S.Ramuthai

85. P.Pappu

86. R.Kuppusamy

87. R.K.Rajaraman

88. N.Radhakrishnan

89. S.Govindasamy

90. M.Subramanian

91. Mrs.P.Kamalam

92. K.Krishnan

93. Mrs.S.Jeyalakshmi

94. A.Subulakshmi

95. T.Jeyaraman

96. R.Nachiyar

97. T.Annadurai

98. R.Indira

99. M.Vellaichamy ... Petitioners Vs.

1. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), (formerly TNEB), Rep by its Chairman / Director, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB), Presently Known as Tamil Nadu, Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, (TANGEDCO), Rep by its Secretary, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

... Respondents

PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in (Per) B.P.(Ch) No.235 dated 01.12.2009 on the file of the second respondent insofar as excluding the merger of dearness relief of 50% from the pension of the petitioners in Clause 2 (e) and the consequential impugned order in Letter No.50449/A3/A32/2019-2 dated 16.11.2019 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the respondents to revise / re-fix the Pay Scale, Pensionary benefits of the petitioners by merging 50% Dearness Allowance along with the Basic pay of the Petitioners with effect from 01.01.2006 instead of 01.08.2006 and to provide all other consequential benefits and arrears on parity with order State Government Employees within the time period stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioners :

Mr. T.Lajapathy Roy For Respondents :

Mr. M.Parameswari Standing Counsel

C O M M O N O R D E R These writ petitions have been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 01.12.2009, insofar as excluding the merger of dearness allowance of 50% from the pension of the petitioners in Clause 2(e) and the consequential impugned order of the second respondent dated 16.11.2019 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to re-fix the pay scale and pensionary benefits of the petitioners, who have retired from service, on par with State Government Employees by way of granting fitment weightage @ 40% of the Basic Pension of the petitioners including the effect of merger of 50% dearness allowance along with arrears and all other consequential benefits.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are the retired employees of the respondent Corporation (TNEB). The Government of Tamil Nadu took a policy decision for merger of 50% dearness allowance with basic pay / pension with effect from 01.01.2006. The said benefit was extended to all the State Government

employees as well as the retired pensioners. However, the said benefit was not extended to the Electricity Board employees like that of the petitioners. Hence, the petitioners and several Associations repeatedly made several representations to the respondents to extend the same benefit to the Board employees. Thereafter, the Board extended the benefit and issued an order for merger of 50% dearness allowance with basic pay / pension with effect from 01.08.2006. However, the petitioners have filed a writ petition in W.P.No.2658 of 2017 before this Court to extend the benefit from 01.01.2006. This Court, by order dated 19.09.2019, directed the second respondent in the writ petition to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 30.11.

2016 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the impugned order dated 16.11.2019 has been passed by the second respondent, wherein the petitioners' request for merger of 50% dearness allowance with basic pay/pension with effect from 01.01.2006 was rejected, which is not sustainable one. Hence, he prayed for allowing these writ petitions.

3. Per contra, the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the State Government have issued order for merger of 50% dearness allowance with basic pay/pension with effect from 01.01.2006. Based on the Government Order, the Unions/Associations have made representations to the respondent Board to extend the said benefit to the employees of the Board. Pursuant to which, the Board has taken a decision, considering the stringent financial position of the Board. The said policy decision was taken on the floor of the Assembly and the same was implemented by Board Proceedings in (Permanent) B.P.(FB).No.41, dated 31.08.2006 and hence, the claim made by the petitioners to implement the same with effect from 01.01.2006 on par with other State Government employees is not sustainable one. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of these writ petitions.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

5. The issue arise in these writ petitions is whether the petitioners are entitled for merger of 50% dearness allowance with basic pay/pension with effect from 01.01.2006. Admittedly, the State Government have decided to implement the merger of 50% dearness allowance with basic pay / pension to the Government employees with effect from 01.01.2006. However, due to stringent financial position, the respondent Electricity Board has not implemented the said benefit to the Board employees with effect from 01.01.2006 and based on the policy decision taken on the floor of the Assembly, they decided to implement the same to the Board employees with effect from 01.08.2006 onwards. This Court cannot interfere with the policy decision taken by the respondent Electricity Board, and grant the relief from 01.01.2006 on par with other State Government employees and it is for the Board has to take a policy decision in consultation with Government on the financial condition of the Board.

6. In the result, these Writ Petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 14.12.2022 NCC: Yes/No Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No AKV To

1. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO), (formerly TNEB), Rep by its Chairman / Director, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

2. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB), Presently Known as Tamil Nadu, Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, (TANGEDCO), Rep by its Secretary, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002.

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

AKV W.P.(MD)Nos.4348 and 3881 of 2020 14.12.2022