Madras High Court
D.Anjaneyulu vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 16 April, 2024
Author: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench: D.Bharatha Chakravarthy
W.P.No.10431 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.04.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.P.No.10431 of 2024
D.Anjaneyulu ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamilnadu
Rep by its Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Secretariat Fort St George,
Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director of Elementary Education,
Chennai-6.
3.The Chief Educational Officer,
Krishnagiri,
Krishnagiri District.
4.The District Educational Officer, (Secondary)
Dharmapuri,
Dharmapuri District.
5.The District Educational Officer, (Secondary)
Hosur,
Krishangiri District.
6.The Block Educational Officer,
Shoolagiri Union,
Krishangiri District.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page No. 1 of 10
W.P.No.10431 of 2024
6.The Block Educational Officer,
Shoolagiri Union,
Krishnagiri District. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to consider the
claim of the petitioner is based upon Rule 40(1) of the Tamil Nadu Pension
Rules, 1978 sanction a compassionate allowance non exceeding two-thirds of
pension or gratuity or both which would have been admissible to him if he
had retired on medical certificate by considering representation of petitioner
dated 08.03.2021 and confer all the consequential benefits including revision
of pension arrears.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganesan
For Respondents : Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru
Special Govt. Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition is filed for a mandamus directing the 1 st respondent to consider the claim of the petitioner under Rule 40(1) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 for sanctioning a compassionate allowance non exceeding two-thirds of pension or gratuity or both which would have been admissible to him if he had retired on medical certificate by considering representation of the petitioner dated 08.03.2021. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 2 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner joined as Secondary grade Headmaster (Telugu) on 26.07.1965. He was duly granted selection grade pay etc,. While so in the year 1998, in view of his transfer to various schools and finally when he was posted at Panchayat Union Primary School, Goraguriki, Shoolagiri Union from 09.12.1998, he could not attended the school and he also failed to inform the higher authorities and had taken treatment in an Ashramam for ill health in Andhra Pradesh. While so, he attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.2002.
3. It seems that in view of his unauthorized absence, the respondents also initiated disciplinary proceedings, by an order dated 29.05.2002 he was removed from service. The petitioner, even though returned to his home, did not challenge the removal order but started making representations from the year 2007 onwards.
4. It is the prayer of the petitioner that he had put in service from the year 1965 to 1998. The same is more than the minimum qualifying service required for granting full pension. He absented himself from service just four years before his superannuation. When the petitioner has put in continuous service all through his time and just because he was unauthorizedly absent for ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 3 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024 four years, he could not be deprived of the entire benefits.
5. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner would place reliance on Rule 40 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, to claim that whenever a Government Servant dismissed or removal from service still the Government can allow part of pension and gratuity. Therefore, he would submit that this would be a fit case for such an exercise of power. The petitioner had made his representation and there is not even any positive response from the respondents. Therefore, he would submit that this Court would issue a mandamus to consider the representation in accordance with law.
6. Per contra, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents would submit that when the petitioner was unauthorizedly absent, due action has been taken and an order of removal has been passed. While passing the order of removal no compassionate allowance has been granted to him. Further, by a communication dated 27.08.2021, the petitioner was informed that since he was removed from service as on 31.05.2002 itself, he would not be entitled for pension or gratuity. However, he will be paid the other benefits due to him as per his service records and he was instructed to make ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 4 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024 application and get the said benefits.
7. I have considered the rival submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on records.
8. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner may be right in contending that in a deserving case even when the punishment for removal from service is imposed, the respondent can sanction compassionate allowance not exceeding 2/3rd of pension or gratuity as per Rule 40 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, still it can be seen that when the impugned order of punishment of removal from service was passed on 29.05.2002, the respondents did not considered the case of the petitioner as a fit case and sanction the same.
9. As a matter of fact, the petitioner did not even take any steps as against the order of removal. Even though the petitioner attained superannuation in the year 2002, he started making representation only in the year 2007. Thereafter, in the year 2024 only he had approached this Court. Further, it can be seen that when the petitioner was in the post of Second ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 5 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024 Grade Headmaster without even informing his higher authority he failed to attend duty. The contention of the petitioner is that he was posted to various schools and therefore he was unable to inform the same to his higher authorities cannot be countenanced. It can be seen from the affidavit filed in support of the petition itself, that the petitioner was initially appointed in Panchayat Union Elementary School, Goraguriki which is a Telugu medium school as of the year 1965. Again the final posting was also in the same school. Therefore, for the personal reasons of the petitioner, the petitioner had abandoned service and it seems that he has come back to his family in the year 2003 only. Therefore, this Court does not see that this case being any special case which deserves any consideration for compassionate allowance. The respondents themselves have not considered and granted compassionate allowance in the order of removal from service which has also become final. Therefore, at this stage, after the lapse of these long years, this is not a fit case where direction can be given for the respondents to consider for grant of compassionate allowance.
10. However, in the communication of the respondent dated 14.03.2008 itself, the respondents have informed that the petitioner will be entitled for such other benefits he will be entitled pursuant to his service. ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 6 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024
11. During the course of the arguments, this Court directed the Special Government Pleader for the respondents was directed to get specific instructions as to what will be the entitlements of the petitioner. Written instructions have been submitted in which, it is stated as follows:-
“vdnt j';fSf;F tuntz;oa fPH;fz;l ,z';fis ,t;tYtyfk; KPyk; tpz;zg;gk; rkh;gpj;J bgw;Wf;bfhs;syhk; vd ,jd; KPyk; bjhptpj;Jf;bfhs;sg;gLfpwJ/ 01/10/1997 md;iwa epytug;go cs;s Cjpaj;jpd; mog;gilapy; kl;Lk; bgw mDkjpf;fg;gLk;/ 1/Mrphpah; itg;g[ epjp - epYitapy; cs;s bjhif 2/rpwg;g[ itg;g[ epjp - muR tpjpfs; go fzpf;fpl;L tH';fg;gLk;
3/brhe;j mYtYf;fhd
<l;lh tpLg;g[ - 168 ehl;fs;
4/<l;oatpLg;g[ - 12 ehl;fs;
nkw;fz;l ehl;fSf;Fz;lhd bjhif jh';fs; filrpahf bgw;w (01/10/1997) Cjpak; kw;Wk; Cjpa tpfpjk;/” Therefore, the said benefits can be paid to the petitioner.
12. In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of on the following directions:-
(i)The prayer of the petitioner for granting compassionate allowance shall stands negatived;
(ii)The petitioner will be entitled to the aforementioned benefits ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 7 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024 pending such as provident fund, SPF, Earned Leave etc., and the said amounts shall be duly calculated and paid out to the petitioner without any further application within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) No costs.
16.04.2024 Index : Yes Speaking Order:Yes Neutral Citation :No jas To
1.The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat Fort St George, Chennai 600 009.
2.The Director of Elementary Education, Chennai-6.
3.The Chief Educational Officer, Krishnagiri, Krishnagiri District.
____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 8 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024
4.The District Educational Officer, (Secondary) Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri District.
5.The District Educational Officer, (Secondary) Hosur, Krishangiri District.
6.The Block Educational Officer, Shoolagiri Union, Krishangiri District.
6.The Block Educational Officer, Shoolagiri Union, Krishnagiri District.
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
jas ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 9 of 10 W.P.No.10431 of 2024 W.P.No.10431 of 2024 16.04.2024 ____________ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No. 10 of 10