Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.59 seconds)
Documents citing O.A. Chinna Alagi vs State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By The ... on 17 October, 2006

Alagammal vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 19 December, 2007

Even after the said order, petitioner submitted representation on 25.4.2005 to the third respondent and on 18.11.2005 the Government sent a letter to the petitioner stating that the petitioner should approach the Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department for sanction of pension. Petitioner again sent a representation to the Commissioner, Municipal Administration on 27.2.2006 and till date petitioner has not been sanctioned the pension or the arrears of pension to petitioner's husband and also family pension payable to the petitioner on the death of petitioner's husband. As the petitioner is now aged 89 years, who retired in the year 1976, the learned counsel submitted that based on the materials furnished by the petitioner as stated supra, respondents may be directed to sanction pension and gratuity payable to the petitioner and also arrears of pension and gratuity payable to the petitioner till the date of death of her husband and family pension after his demise. The learned counsel also cited a decision of this Court reported in 2006 (5) CTC 320 (O.A.Chinna Alagi v. State of Tamil Nadu) in support of his contentions.
Madras High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 2 - N N Vasanthakumar - Full Document

The Accountant General(A&E) vs Udiyar on 17 July, 2018

5. Admittedly, the respondents were appointed on temporary basis on 30.11.1954, 18.02.1972 and 20.03.1962 respectively and retired from service on 30.09.1996, 30.09.1996 and 30.06.1996 respectively after completing more than ten years of service. The question as to the entitlement of pension in respect of temporary employees came up for consideration before this Court in Chinna Alagi, O.A. v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2006 (5) CTC 320, wherein, in paragraph No.7, it has been held as follows:
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - M Duraiswamy - Full Document

M.Vellaiyan vs ) The Secretary To Government on 5 September, 2018

7. Learned counsel further drew the attention of this Court to the judgment reported in 2006 5 CTC 320 in the matter of O.A.Chinna Alagi vs., the State of Tamil Nadu and others, wherein, an employee, who is a contingent staff, who has served for 21 years, has been denied pensionary benefits and it was therefore, directed by the Government to extend the pensionary benefits due to her.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 6 - S Vaidyanathan - Full Document

Sankaranarayanan vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 15 July, 2016

11. A similar issue came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).No.363 of 2010 [The Tahsildar, Vs. Esakki and others] and by Judgment dated 20.08.2010, the Division Bench, following the Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of A.P.Srivastava v. Union of India and ors., reported in 1996 (1) LLJ 241 and also the order of this Court in Chinna Alagi, O.A. v. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2006 (5) CTC 320, dismissed the Writ Appeal filed by the Government.
Madras High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - T Raja - Full Document
1