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
- THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAEXTRA-ORDINARY APPELLATE JURISDICTIONSPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3056 OF 2023CHOUDAPPA & ANR. PETITIONER(S)VERSUS CHOUDAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)ORDERHeard learned senior counsel for theparties.The challenge in the present special leave petition is to the revisional order dated 22nd July, 2022 passed by the High Court dismissing the revision of the petitioners arising from the rejection of their application alleged to have been filed under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(for short, ‘C.P.C.’).A suit for recovery of possession and
- Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice R. Mahadevan clarified that an application seeking the determination of mesne profits, even if filed decades later, is merely a reminder for the court to complete an inquiry and does not constitute a new suit or execution.
- வக்கீல் ஏற்காடு ஏ.மோகன்தாஸ் தரப்பில் வக்கீல் யானை ராஜேந்திரன் ஆஜராகி, ‘‘கள்ளக்குறிச்சி கைதான கண்ணுக்குட்டி என்பவர் மீது 31 சாராய வழக்குகள் உள்ளன. 20 ஆண்டுகளாக சாராய தொழில் செய்வதாக கூறியுள்ளார். அதனால், ஆளும் கட்சியாக தி.மு.க., மீது மட்டும் குற்றம் சாட்டவில்லை. சாராய தொழிலுக்கு அ.தி.மு.க.,வும் துணை போய் உள்ளது. உள்ளூர்
- பொறுப்பு தலைமை நீதிபதி டி. கிருஷ்ணகுமார் மற்றும் நீதிபதி பி.பி. பாலாஜி ஆகியோர் அடங்கிய அமர்வில் மீண்டும் விசாரணைக்கு வந்தது. அப்போது உயர் நீதிமன்றம் ஏற்கெனவே நியமித்த வழக்கறிஞர் எம்.சி.சுவாமி தனது அறிக்கையில், ஆக்கிரமிப்புகளை அகற்றுவதில் பல்வேறு நடைமுறை சிக்கல்கள் இருப்பதாகவும், எனவே அனைத்து
- MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANW.P.No.12254 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.13346 of 2024M.Sathiya … PetitionerVs/TNPSC selection committee
More
Recent Posts
- THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIAEXTRA-ORDINARY APPELLATE JURISDICTIONSPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 3056 OF 2023CHOUDAPPA & ANR. PETITIONER(S)VERSUS CHOUDAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)ORDERHeard learned senior counsel for theparties.The challenge in the present special leave petition is to the revisional order dated 22nd July, 2022 passed by the High Court dismissing the revision of the petitioners arising from the rejection of their application alleged to have been filed under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(for short, ‘C.P.C.’).A suit for recovery of possession and
- Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice R. Mahadevan clarified that an application seeking the determination of mesne profits, even if filed decades later, is merely a reminder for the court to complete an inquiry and does not constitute a new suit or execution.
- வக்கீல் ஏற்காடு ஏ.மோகன்தாஸ் தரப்பில் வக்கீல் யானை ராஜேந்திரன் ஆஜராகி, ‘‘கள்ளக்குறிச்சி கைதான கண்ணுக்குட்டி என்பவர் மீது 31 சாராய வழக்குகள் உள்ளன. 20 ஆண்டுகளாக சாராய தொழில் செய்வதாக கூறியுள்ளார். அதனால், ஆளும் கட்சியாக தி.மு.க., மீது மட்டும் குற்றம் சாட்டவில்லை. சாராய தொழிலுக்கு அ.தி.மு.க.,வும் துணை போய் உள்ளது. உள்ளூர்
- பொறுப்பு தலைமை நீதிபதி டி. கிருஷ்ணகுமார் மற்றும் நீதிபதி பி.பி. பாலாஜி ஆகியோர் அடங்கிய அமர்வில் மீண்டும் விசாரணைக்கு வந்தது. அப்போது உயர் நீதிமன்றம் ஏற்கெனவே நியமித்த வழக்கறிஞர் எம்.சி.சுவாமி தனது அறிக்கையில், ஆக்கிரமிப்புகளை அகற்றுவதில் பல்வேறு நடைமுறை சிக்கல்கள் இருப்பதாகவும், எனவே அனைத்து
- MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANW.P.No.12254 of 2024 and W.M.P.No.13346 of 2024M.Sathiya … PetitionerVs/TNPSC selection committee