Madras High Court directs Tamil Nadu government to consider plea to hike special pension
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently directed the state government to consider the representation of 342 retired employees of the social welfare department, seeking enhancement of their special pension of Rs 2,000, on sympathetic grounds.
Justice Mummineni Sudheer Kumar passed the order on a joint petition filed by the retired employees three years ago, against the government order passed by the social welfare department in 2019, fixing Rs 2,000 as their pension amount. According to the judgment, the petitioners were initially appointed as ‘Bala Sevikas’ in different panchayat unions on consolidated pay. They were awarded regular-time scale of pay, absorbed as Rural Welfare Officers Grade-II, and subsequently promoted to different categories before retiring from service. Since the services of all the petitioners were absorbed only after April 1, 2003, the government declared them ineligible for pension under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, and instead issued the aforesaid G.O., granting them a special pension of Rs 2,000, on compassionate grounds. Aggrieved by the meagre amount, the petitioners moved the high court.
The petitioners argued that though a full bench of the court already negatived their claim in 2019, many similarly placed people have been granted relief by the single and division benches of the court on several occasions. They also pointed out that they have served for more than 30 years, and only because of the latches of the government, their service could not be regularised before April 2003. Thus, they were deprived of pension both under the TN Pension Rules and the Contributory Pension Scheme, they explained.
Even though the said G.O. was passed by taking the aforesaid factors into consideration, the pension amount is ‘too low’ and ‘insufficient’ to meet their basic needs, they added and requested the court to direct the government to enhance the pension amount.
Justice Kumar directed the petitioners to give a fresh representation to the government within a month, with further directions to the government to consider the representation by taking into account the length of the petitioners’ service, cost of living and other factors, within four months. The judge further told the government to consider the case of the petitioners on sympathetic grounds and make provision for the enhancement of such pension regularly, based on inflation, during every pay revision.