The Government of Tamil Nadu vs N. Rajendran

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.08.2026
CORAM
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
W.A.NOS.3494 AND 3435 OF 2023
AND
CMP NOS.28530 AND 28139 OF 2023
W.A.NO.3494 OF 2023
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. By its Principal Secretary to Govt.,
Finance (Pension) Department
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. By its Secretary to Govt.,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Dept.,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The District Collector
Ariyalur District, Ariyalur. … Appellants
Vs.
1.N.Rajendran
2.The Principal Accountant General
(Accounts & Entitlements) Tamil Nadu
361, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 018.
3.The Commissioner
Thirumanur Panchayat Union,
Thirumanur, Ariyalur District.
Page No.1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
4.The Block Development Officer
Panchayat Union Office
Thirumanur, Ariyalur District. … Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,
praying to set aside the order 31.10.2022 passed in W.P.No.22620 of
2013.
For Appellants : Mrs.Y.Kavitha
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent-1: Mrs.T.Hemalatha
W.A.NO.3435 OF 2023
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. By its Principal Secretary to Govt.,
Finance (Pension) Department
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. By its Secretary to Govt.,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Dept.,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
3.The District Collector
Perambalur District, Perambalur. … Appellants
Vs.
1.S.Xavier
2.The Principal Accountant General
(Accounts & Entitlements) Tamil Nadu
361, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 018.
Page No.2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
3.The Commissioner
Veppur Panchayat Union,
Veppur, Perambalur District.
4.The Block Development Officer
Panchayat Union Office
Veppur, Perambalur District. … Respondents
PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,
praying to set aside the order 31.10.2022 passed in W.P.No.22625 of
2013.
For Appellants : Mrs.Y.Kavitha
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent-1: Mrs.T.Hemalatha
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam, J.)
In the present case, the first respondent / writ petitioner in
W.A.No.3494 of 2023 joined as Part Time Clerk in Panchayat Union
office on 01.08.1973. He was absorbed as Junior Assistant on full time
basis with effect from 31.12.1990.
2.Similarly, the first respondent / writ petitioner in
W.A.No.3435 of 2023 joined as Part Time Clerk in Panchayat Union
office on 16.05.1972. He was absorbed as Junior Assistant on full time
basis with effect from 28.12.1990.
Page No.3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
3.The claim of the first respondent in both the intra-court
appeals is for counting 50% of the services rendered as Part-Time Clerks
in the Panchayat Union Office.
4.The issue raised in the present writ appeals is no more res
integra and already decided by this Court in a batch of intra-court
appeals in the case of The State of Tamil Nadu and Others Vs.
A.Chidambaram reported in 2026:MHC:2486. In the said judgment, this
Court considered the rule position as well as the entitlement of the Part
Time Clerks in Panchayat Union Office. The relevant paragraphs are
extracted hereunder:
“27.In the present batch of appeals, the
grounds for relief are based on the Government
Orders implementing Court orders, and certainly not
on the foothold of the Rules/law in place.
Consequently, such individual orders have been
followed as precedent in similarly placed
consequential cases, creating a spinning wheel of
precedent to choose from, thereby causing
inconsistency and diluting the actual Rules/law in
force.
28.The question arises: when certain orders
relied on are running counter to the Pension Rules in
force, and have been passed merely by relying on
Page No.4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
earlier orders as well as Government Orders
implementing those court orders, can such orders be
followed in perpetuity?
29.In this regard, reliance has been placed
on the Full Bench judgment in the case of P.L.S.
Palaniappan cited supra. It is considered that Article
14 of the Constitution of India cannot be invoked for
perpetuating illegality. A wrong order passed in one
case cannot be made the basis for compelling a
public authority to pass a similar order in any other
case. Even if the State implements an erroneous
order passed by the Court, it cannot be precluded
from challenging a similar order passed in another
case, simply because an appeal was not preferred in
the earlier case.
VII. CONCLUSION:
30.Relying on the legal principle considered
as above, this Court could arrive at the irresistible
conclusion that those Government Orders and the
judgments of the Single Judges and the Division
Bench, running counter to the ratio laid down by the
Full Bench judgments cited supra, cannot be a
ground to claim the relief of counting of 50% of
service in respect of part-time service rendered. The
said benefit is to be granted strictly in accordance
with the Pension Rules.
Page No.5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
31.Therefore, all the orders of the learned
Single Judges and Division Bench judgments,
running counter to Rule 11(2) and 11(4) of the Rules,
1978 and contrary to the judgments of the Full
Bench of this Court, have denuded to lose its status
as precedent and cannot be followed for granting the
relief of counting of 50% of service rendered by Part-
Time Panchayat Clerks, or employees served in
part-time employment.”
5.In view of the judgment cited supra, the impugned writ
orders dated 31.10.2022 passed in W.P.No.22620 of 2013 and
W.P.No.22625 of 2013 are set aside and the writ appeals are allowed.
No costs. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [K.G.R., J.]

28.08.2026
Index : Yes
Speaking Order : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
TK
Page No.6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
To
1.The Principal Accountant General
(Accounts & Entitlements) Tamil Nadu
361, Anna Salai,
Chennai – 600 018.
2.The Commissioner
Thirumanur Panchayat Union,
Thirumanur, Ariyalur District.
3.The Block Development Officer
Panchayat Union Office
Thirumanur, Ariyalur District.
4.The Commissioner
Veppur Panchayat Union,
Veppur, Perambalur District.
5.The Block Development Officer
Panchayat Union Office
Veppur, Perambalur District.
Page No.7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )

W.A.NOS.3494 & 3435 OF 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J.
TK

W.A.NOS.3494 AND 3435 OF 2023
28.08.2026
Page No.8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/09/2026 11:24:47 am )