C.Mathivanan, v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.02.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P(MD)No.9601 of 2018 and W.M.P(MD)No.6999 of 2018 1.C.Mathivanan 2.M.Abhisheik ... Petitioners Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of Finance (Pension), Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Principal Accountant General (A &E), Office of the Accountant General, 261, Annasalai, Chennai - 600 018.
4.The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
5.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Theni, Theni District.
6.The Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Theni, Theni District.
1/9
7.The Secretary, Nadar Saraswathi Primary School Theni, Theni District.
8.The Commissioner, Government Data Center, Anna University Campus, Gandhi Mandapam Road, Chennai - 600 025. ... Respondents (8th respondent is impleaded as per order dated 16.02.2023 made in W.M.P(MD)No.8845 of 2018 in W.P(MD)No.7308 of 2018 by MDIJ) PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the third respondent Principal Accountant General in No.P24/2/12415381/ADK dated 23.06.2017, quash the same and further direct the respondents 3 to 7 herein to sanction and disburse forthwith the pension benefits due to the petitioners viz., the General Provident Fund, Gratuity, Pension admissible to the petitioners with penal interest at the rate of 12%. For Petitioner :Mr.K.Prabhu For RR1, 2, 4 to 6 :Mr.S.Saji Bino, Special Government Pleader For R-3 :Mr.P.Gunasekaran For R-7 :Mr.H.Mohamed Imran 2/9
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned proceedings issued by the third respondent Principal Accountant General in No.P24/2/12415381/ADK, dated 23.06.2017 and further, to direct the respondents 3 to 7, to sanction and disburse forthwith the pension benefits due to the petitioners viz., the General Provident Fund, Gratuity, Pension admissible to the petitioners with penal interest at the rate of 12%.
2. The case of the petitioners is that the wife of the first petitioner and the wife of the second respondent, worked as a Secondary Grade Teacher and at the age of 46, due to blood cancer, she died on 23.02.2017 leaving behind the petitioners as legal heirs. Subsequently, the seventh respondent submitted a proposal dated ....05.2017 to the sixth respondent requesting to sanction and disburse the retirement benefits. Thereafter, the sixth respondent after careful consideration sanctioned both Death-cum-retirement benefits and family pension and forwarded a proposal for disbursement of the benefits to the third respondent Accountant General along with his recommendation, dated 18.05.2017. However, to the shock and surprise of the petitioners, the third 3/9
respondent vide the impugned proceedings, dated 23.06.2017, rejected the proposal stating that the wife of the first petitioner was appointed on 04.04.2003 (ie., after 01.04.2003), she was not entitled for pensionary benefits. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the wife of the first petitioner got selected on 04.04.2003 and thereafter, the Educational Authorities approved her appointment on 10.04.2003, the recruitment process started much before the crucial date ie., 01.04.2003 and hence, the petitioner is entitled to come under the Old Pension Scheme and therefore, the impugned rejection order passed by the third respondents is not sustainable one and prays for appropriate orders.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents, would submit that the wife of the first petitioner and mother of the second petitioner was selected by the School Committee and appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher on 04.04.2003 and the said appointment was also approved vide order of the fifth 4/9
respondent, dated 10.04.2003. As per G.O.Ms.No.430, Finance(Pension) Department, dated 06.08.2004, the Government of Tamil Nadu introduced Contributory Pension Scheme for the employees appointed on or after 01.04.2003. The Old Pension Scheme would not apply to the employees appointed on or after 01.04.2003 and the New Contributory Scheme became operational from 01.04.2003. The employees appointed on or after 01.04.2003 are eligible for CPS Scheme and not eligible for Old Pension Scheme. Further, as per the orders of the Government Data Centre, 01.04.2010, the wife of the first petitioner was allotted with CPS number along with other teachers appointed after 01.04.2003. The said fact was communicated to the management of the concerned schools by an order dated 20.04.2010.
However, suppressing the said fact, the seventh respondent school management, continued to contribute under the ASTPF Account, which was wrongly obtained. As and when Contributory Pension Scheme number was allotted to the Teacher, it was the duty of the school management to follow the instructions received from the Department and continue to contribute to the new Scheme of CPS instead of Old Pension Scheme and therefore, there is no illegality or irregularity in the order passed by the third respondent.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.
6. Admittedly, the wife of the first petitioner was appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the seventh respondent school on 04.04.2003 and the same was approved on 10.04.2003. As per G.O.Ms.No.430, dated 06.08.2004, the Government of Tamil Nadu, introduced a Contributory Pension Scheme mandatory for the employees appointed on or after 01.04.2003. Under the Contributory Pension Scheme, the employer has to contribute amount towards New Pension Scheme and the Old Pension Scheme will not apply to the employees appointed on or after 01.04.2003.
7. In the present case, though the selection process was started before 01.04.2003, the petitioner was appointed only on 04.04.2003 and the same was approved on 10.04.2003 and hence, the Old Pension Scheme is not applicable to her and therefore, this Court cannot interfere with the order passed by the third respondent. However, the seventh respondent school management shall forward a fresh pension proposal to the appropriate authority for disbursement of terminal benefits to the 6/9
petitioner under the New Pension Scheme as per G.O.Ms.No.430, Finance(Pension) Department, dated 06.08.2004. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and settle the benefits in favour of the petitioners.
With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 16.02.2023 NCC:Yes/No Index: Yes/No pm To:
1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Department of Finance (Pension), Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
3.The Principal Accountant General (A &E), Office of the Accountant General, 261, Annasalai, Chennai - 600 018.
7/9
4.The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 006.
5.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Theni, Theni District.
6.The Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Theni, Theni District.
7.The Secretary, Nadar Saraswathi Primary School Theni, Theni District.
8/9
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
pm W.P.(MD)No.7308 of 2018 16.02.2023 9/9