Madras High Court Adjudicates Writ Petition Seeking Certiorarified Mandamus to Quash Order Denying Terminal Benefits and Pension. Government Teacher Challenges Order of Principal Accountant General Dated 09.01.2019.

High Court: Madras High Court Bench: Madurai
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The writ petition was filed by a government teacher who had a service history in minority institutions and later in government schools. She was initially appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher in a minority school in 1984, later shifted to another minority school, and eventually joined government service as a B.T. Assistant in 1987. She obtained higher qualifications and received incentive increments. She was promoted as P.G. Assistant in 1994. The first respondent, the Principal Accountant General, passed an order dated 09.01.2019, allegedly connecting different service periods and treating her as having received three sets of incentive increments erroneously, thereby affecting her pension and terminal benefits. The petitioner contended that the order was passed without application of mind and sought its quashing along with a direction to sanction full terminal benefits and pension. The writ petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The available text does not include the court's decision or reasoning, as the judgment extract ends mid-sentence.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Pension and Terminal Benefits - Entitlement to full pension and terminal benefits - Constitution of India, Article 226 - The petitioner, a government teacher, filed a writ petition seeking to quash an order denying her pension and terminal benefits on the ground that the first respondent connected different service periods without application of mind and incorrectly assumed she received three sets of incentive increments - The matter was argued but no final order or reasoning is available in the extracted judgment text (Paras 1-2).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the order passed by the first respondent dated 09.01.2019 is liable to be quashed and whether the petitioner is entitled to sanction of terminal benefits and full pension.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Law Points

  • writ of certiorarified mandamus
  • pension entitlement
  • terminal benefits
  • incentive increment computation
  • service connection
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (MAD) (02) 257

W.P.(MD)No.3235 of 2019 and W.M.P.(MD)No.2523 of 2019

2025-02-05

Justice M.Jothiraman

2025:MHC:468

V.Panneerselvam, P.Gunasekaran, G.V.Vairam Santhosh

J.Packiamary

1.The Principal Accountant General (A & E), Chennai; 2.The Director, Adi-Dravidar Welfare Department, Chennai

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking certiorarified mandamus to quash an order denying pension and terminal benefits.

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought quashing of the order dated 09.01.2019 passed by the first respondent and a direction for sanction of terminal benefits and full pension.

Filing Reason

The first respondent passed an order connecting different service periods of the petitioner without application of mind, erroneously concluding she had received three sets of incentive increments, resulting in denial of full pension and terminal benefits.

Issues

Legality of the order dated 09.01.2019 passed by the first respondent Entitlement of the petitioner to terminal benefits and full pension

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner contended that the first respondent connected different service periods without application of mind and incorrectly held that she received three sets of incentive increments, when she actually obtained only one set as P.G. Assistant and two sets earlier for higher qualifications, and therefore the order is liable to be quashed.

Judgment Excerpts

connecting the different service without application of mind and passing the order, as if the petitioner has received three sets of incentive increment in the same This writ petition has been filed seeking orders to quash the order passed by the first respondent ... and direct the respondents to sanction the terminal benefits and full pension to the petitioner.

Procedural History

The writ petition was filed in 2019 challenging the order dated 09.01.2019. The matter was heard on 05.02.2025, but the judgment text is incomplete and does not include the final order.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Adjudicates Writ Petition Seeking Certiorarified Mandamus to Quash Order Denying Terminal Benefits and Pension. Government Teacher Challenges Order of Principal Accountant General Dated 09.01.2019.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of Non-Union Workers Seeking Settlement Benefits — Conditional Undertaking and Delay Justify Denial of Retrospective Benefits. Settlement under Section 2(p) read with Section 18(1) of Industrial Disputes Act, 19...