Pension Scheme Can Be Claimed From Date Of Entering Into Service, Not Date Of Approval Of Regular Appointment: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court recently observed that the relevant date while considering the pensionary benefits of Teachers would be the date on which the teacher entered into service and not the date on which the appointment was actually confirmed. 

Justice S. Vaidyanathan and Justice N Mala relied on the decision in V.Vasanthi v. State of Tamil Nadu wherein, on similar facts, the court had held that the service period of teachers commences from the date of appointment and not from the date of approval, even though the monetary benefits start to accrue only from the date of completion of the training. Thus, the service rendered before the completion of training was also to be considered for pension.

In light of the order in Vasanthi's case, the court observed as under:

We are therefore of the view that the issue raised in this writ appeal is covered by the Judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in V.Vasanthi's case. The contention of the respondent that the relevant date would be the date of approval of appointment cannot be countenanced and hence, the same stands rejected. 

Background

The Government of Tamil Nadu passed G.O.Ms.No.559 School Education Department dated 11.07.1995 prohibiting the appointment of graduate teachers in secondary grade vacancy. Some schools appointed the respondents in violation of this GO. These appointments were not confirmed by the appellants. The teachers who were affected approached the High Court where the High Court confirmed the validity of the G.O and also directed to approve the appointments made from 11.07.1995 to 19.05.1998. 

Pursuant to the order, the Government issued G.O Ms.No. 155 dated 03.10.2002 giving permission for approval for B.T teachers who were appointed as Secondary Grade teachers during the period from 11.07.1995 to 19.05.1998, subject to their undergoing one month Child Psychology Training. These teachers were granted approval of appointment after they completed their one month training. 

While so, the President of Tamil Nadu recognised aided School Managers Association made a representation requesting for extending the benefit of G.O.Ms. 155 dated 03.10.2002 to the teachers appointed till the order of the High Court. The government accepted the representation and issued G.O.Ms.No. 150 extending the benefits of earlier GO to 22 teachers who were appointed subsequent to the cut off date and before the order of the High Court. 

The teachers covered under the G.O Ms,. 155 challenged certain provision of the GO with respect to recovery from the teachers before the High Court and the same was allowed. A single bench directed the government to consider the past service of the teachers for the purpose of pensionary benefits. As per the judgement of the court, the Government passed G.O.Ms.No.430 dated 06.08.2004 introducing New Pension Scheme and the cut off date for New Pension Scheme was given as 01.04.2003

The teachers covered under the GO Ms. No. 155 filed writ petitions praying for a direction to count their past services prior to completion of Child Psychology Training for pensionary benefits. The court ordered in favour of the teachers and the Government passed G.O.Ms.Ms.413 implementing the order of the court. 

Two other teachers, whose appointments were approved on completion of training in 09.11.2007 also approached court seeking benefits of old pension scheme. The court passed a common order on 22.12.2010 ordering that they would be entitled to the pension scheme applicable to teachers prior to 01.04.2003 and they would not be governed by G.O.Ms.No.430 dated 06.08.2004. 

The main ground on which the appellants herein were denying the challenge was that their appointments were approved with effect from 09.11.2007 and therefore they would not be covered by the Old Pension Scheme, but would be covered only, under the New Pension Scheme introduced vide G.O.Ms.No.430 dated 06.08.2004. 

The court was however not inclined to accept this submission. Finding no infirmity in the order of the single judge, the court confirmed the same and directed the appellant Government to extend the benefits to the respondents within four months time.

Case Title: The State of Tamil Nadu and others v. R Chitradevi and others

Case No: W.A.Nos. 1573, 1574 and 1577 of 2021

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 290

Counsel for the Appellants: Mr.Abishek Murthy Government Advocate

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.S.N.Ravichandran (R1)

Click here to read/download the judgment