1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29.04.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD)No.5157 of 2011 K.Thangamuthu : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director, Department of Elementary Education, Chennai – 600 006. 2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, District Elementary Education Office, Theni, Theni District. : Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.03.2011, which was forwarded by the Director of School Eduction Vide Na.Ka.No.23229/V2/E1/11 dated 26.03.2011 by providing all monetary and service benefits and full pension as par with other teachers. For Petitioner : M/s.Kanimozhi Suresh For Respondents : Mr.V.Rajasekaran, Spl.G.P. ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 2. By consent of both the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing. 3. The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for a Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to direct the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 09.03.2011, which was forwarded by the Director of School Eduction Vide Na.Ka.No.23229/V2/E1/11 dated 26.03.2011 by providing all monetary and service benefits and full pension. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on 01.06.1960 as part time Tailoring teacher by the Tamil Nadu Government in the S.S.B.Secondary School at Thambinayakkanpatti, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Theni District. He worked there for 2 years till 31.05.1962. Later, he was appointed as full time teacher in the same school. After completion of 29 years of service in the said school, he has retired from service on 31.03.1991 on attaining the age of superannuation. During the service, he has received only a consolidated payment. After retirement, he is getting only a meager amount of pension. Therefore, he sent various representations to the authorities, requesting to pay pension as per the rules. The denial of pension was for the reason that he has not qualified himself with T.T.C. However, the Tamil Nadu Government has passed a G.O. Stating that T.T.C. was not necessary during the course of appointment. 5. The further case of the petitioner is that based on the said G.O., 2 teachers by name one Mr.Narayanasamy and Mrs.R.Rathinam were granted full pension. However, the case of the petitioner was not considered. Hence, the petitioner gave a further representation to the 1st respondent on 09.03.2011. However, the said representation was not considered so far and hence, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition for the relief stated earlier. 6. Considering the limited scope of the matter, without expressing any opinion on the claim made by the petitioner, I direct the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.03.2011 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Accounts) /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Director, Department of Elementary Education, Chennai – 600 006. 2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, District Elementary Education Office, Theni, Theni District. +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.16318) Order made in W.P.(MD)No.5157 of 2011 29.04.2011 arul NSV/19.5.11/2P/4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/