IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.09.2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.Nos.44199, 41613, 46077 and 46720 of 2006 R.Visweswaran Nair ... Petitioner in W.P.No.44199 of 2006 M.Thankaraj ... Petitioner in W.P.No.41613 of 2006 S.Michelal S.Arumugam C.Subramanian Pillai A.Doraiswamy K.Chidambaram A.Gnanasigamony V.Thiraviakesavadas P.Davidson Iyadurai P.Iyadurai K.Lalithambal R.Robinson M.Thomas S.Thomas P.Vargese ... Petitioners in W.P.No.46077 of 2006 J.Chelladurai K.Dileepan Nadar ... Petitioners in W.P.No.46720 of 2006 Versus Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009. ... Respondent in all the writ petitions PRAYER in all the W.Ps': These Writ Petitions came to be numbered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus by way of transfer of O.A.Nos.2694, 2946, 3353 and 3790 of 2000, to declare that G.O.Ms.Nos.174 dated 21.04.1998 read with G.O.Ms.No.500 dated 16.09.1998, G.O.Ms.No.740, dated 29.12.1998 and G.O.Ms.No.200, dated 18.05.1999 issued by the respondent are unconstitutional and void with reference to the petitioners and consequently direct the respondent to grant the petitioners the same rate of pension as is granted to employees who retired before 01.01.1996 or after 01.07.1996 with all arrears of pension and other benefits with effect from 01.01.1996. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioners in all W.P's : M/s. Row and Reddy For Respondent in all the W.Ps': Mrs.Lita Srinivasan Government Advocate C O M M O N O R D E R The writ petitioners retired from service in between 01.01.1996 and 30.06.1996. Their grievance is that they were discriminated in the matter of pension, when compared to the persons who retired prior to 01.01.1996 and the persons who retired after 30.06.1996. 2. Hence, the petitioners have filed the batch of Original Applications in O.A.Nos.2694, 2946, 3353 and 3790 of 2000, to declare that G.O.Ms.Nos.174 dated 21.04.1998 read with G.O.Ms.No.500 dated 16.09.1998, G.O.Ms.No.740, dated 29.12.1998 and G.O.Ms.No.200, dated 18.05.1999 issued by the respondent are unconstitutional and void with reference to the petitioners and for a direction to the respondent to grant the petitioners the same rate of pension as is granted to employees who retired before 01.01.1996 or after 01.07.1996 with all arrears of pension and other benefits with effect from 01.01.1996. 3. On abolition of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, the matters stood transferred to this Court and renumbered as W.P.Nos.44199, 41613, 46077 and 46720 of 2006. 4. Heard M/s. Row and Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners in all the writ petitions and Mrs.Lita Srinivasan, learned Government Advocate for the respondent in all the writ petitions. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the matter is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in VW.Rajanayagam v. Govt. of Tamil Nadu reported in 2004 (2) L.L.N. 447. It is further submitted that the said judgment of learned Single Judge was confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court on 11.06.2007 in W.A.No.2886 of 2004. I have perused the judgment and the operative portion of the judgment reported in 2004 (2) L.L.N. 447 is as follows: "Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed holding that G.O.Ms.No.174, dated 21st April 1998, read with G.O.Ms.No.500, dated 16th September 1998, G.O.Ms.No.740, dated 29th December 1998 and G.O.Ms.No.200, dated 18th May 1999 and G.O.Ms.No.199, dated 15th May 2000, are unconstitutional in so far as it relates to the applicants in giving a different https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ treatment to the petitioners who retired between 1st January 1996 and 30th June 1996 and consequently, the respondents directed to grant the applicants the same rate of pension as is granted to the employees who retired before 1st January 1996 or after 1st July 1996 with all difference in arrears of pension and other benefits with effect from the date of their retirement. No costs." 6. Hence, these writ petitions are allowed in terms of the aforesaid judgment reported in 2004 (2) L.L.N. 447. The respondent is directed to comply with the order within a period of six weeks from today. No costs. r n s Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu Finance (Pay Cell) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009. + 1 cc to Government Pleader, SR No.69927 RSI(CO) SR/22.9.2010 W.P.Nos.44199, 41613, 46077 and 46720 of 2006 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/