Follow:
- Next story Chennai: The Madras high court has held that those government servants /employees, who are freshly appointed on or after April 1, 2003, are not entitled to pension in view of proviso to Rule 2 of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 inserted by G.O dated August 6, 2003. The Full Bench comprising Justices R.Subbiah, P.T.Asha and C.Saravanan gave the ruling while answering the reference made to it on a batch of petitions and appeals from individual employees and state government. The Full bench said such reference came to be made by the division bench on noticing that there were two conflicting decisions rendered by the division benches of this court. In one of the judgments, it was held that persons who were absorbed and/or regularized to service after April 1, 2003 were not entitled to count half of the past service rendered by them for the purpose of conferment of pensionary benefits along with the service rendered by them after regularization. Another division bench held that such persons, whose service came to be regularized after April 1, 2003 were entitled and/or eligible to count half of the services rendered by them on daily wage basis prior to their regularization, for the purpose of conferment of pensionary benefits. Thus, this contrary view taken by two division bench of this court has led to the present reference to this Full bench, the Full bench added. The Full Bench held that those government servants/employees appointed prior to April 1, 2003 whether on temporary or permanent basis in terms of Rule 10 (a) (1) of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules will be entitled to get pension as per the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978. In case, a government employee/servant had also rendered service in non-provincialised service, or on consolidated pay or on honorarium or daily wage basis and if such services were regularized before April 1, 2003, half of service rendered shall be counted for the purpose of conferment of pensionary benefits, the Full Bench added. The Full Bench said those government servants who were appointed in the aforesaid four categories before the cut off date and later appointed under Rule 10 (a) (1) of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules and absorbed into regular service after April 1, 2003 will not be entitled to count half of their past service for the purpose of determination of qualifying service for pension. Those government servants, who were appointed in the aforesaid four categories before April 1, 2003 but were absorbed in regular service after April 1, 2003 will not be entitled to count half of their past service for the purpose of determination of qualifying service for pension, the Full Bench added.
- Previous story *SC Quashes All Criminal Cases Against Salman Khan In Connection With Movie ‘Loveratri’ [Read Order]* https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/loveratri-sc-quashes-cases-against-salman-khan-150394
Recent Posts
- Head notes /M Ravi Advocate / A) Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1955 – Rule 17(b) – Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973 – Delay in disciplinary proceedings – Petitioner, a Village Administrative Officer, was dismissed after a decade-long delay in proceedings for alleged irregularities in land issuance – The court found the delay prejudicial and discriminatory, as co-delinquents faced lesser penalties – The court emphasized the need for timely resolution in disciplinary matters. (Paras 3, 4, 25, 27
- Kanadasan son case mhc order
- Justice Mrs.Mala as Item No.24. Where Senior Advocate and Former State PP Mr.A.Natarajan appeared for the son of Kaviarasu Kannadhasan and sought the court intervention against the rejection order passed by Tamil Nadu EB department, who refused to provide EB connection
- Justice J Sathya Narayana Prasad directed MTC to refund Rs 25,200 and clear all pending retirement dues with 6% annual interest.”
- கிறிஸ்துவ மத போதகர் ஜாமீன் கோரி
More
Recent Posts
- Head notes /M Ravi Advocate / A) Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules, 1955 – Rule 17(b) – Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973 – Delay in disciplinary proceedings – Petitioner, a Village Administrative Officer, was dismissed after a decade-long delay in proceedings for alleged irregularities in land issuance – The court found the delay prejudicial and discriminatory, as co-delinquents faced lesser penalties – The court emphasized the need for timely resolution in disciplinary matters. (Paras 3, 4, 25, 27
- Kanadasan son case mhc order
- Justice Mrs.Mala as Item No.24. Where Senior Advocate and Former State PP Mr.A.Natarajan appeared for the son of Kaviarasu Kannadhasan and sought the court intervention against the rejection order passed by Tamil Nadu EB department, who refused to provide EB connection
- Justice J Sathya Narayana Prasad directed MTC to refund Rs 25,200 and clear all pending retirement dues with 6% annual interest.”
- கிறிஸ்துவ மத போதகர் ஜாமீன் கோரி
