Judgment : Per Ms. PRABHA SRIDEVAN, J. 1. This writ appeal concerns the right of the staff working in the Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority to claim pension right from the date on which they were employed in the Tamil Nadu Legal Aid and Advice Board. The State of Tamil Nadu in discharge of its constitutional obligation as spelt out in Article 39-A of the Constitution of India set up the Tamil Nadu Legal Aid and Advice Board by G.O. Ms. No. 3048 Home (Courts IV) Department dated 3.12.1976. This was to secure as per the Constitutional mandate that the operation of the legal system promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity and in particular, to provide free legal aid so that no specific person is denied the opportunity to secure justice by reason of economic or other disabilities. The Board was registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. It was governed by Tamil Nadu Legal Aid and Advice Board Rules and the bye-laws were published in the Tamil Nadu Gazette. Clause 3 of the Memorandum provided that the object of the Board inter aliawould be to offer legal aid to poor and deserving persons. Clause 4 of the memorandum provided that the management of the affairs of the State Board shall vest in the governing body which comprised of His Excellency the Governor, the Hon‘ble Chief Justice as patron in Chief, the Hon‘ble Law Minister as patron and other members were drawn from the government apart from the Presidents of the Bar Association and Advocates Association. Rule 22 dealt with the funds of the State Board provided that the funds shall consist of grants of the Central or State Government or Local authority or donations or subscriptions by institutions or other persons. The utilization of funds was also audited by the State Government. In 1987, Parliament enacted the Legal Services Authorities Act. But it is only by notification dated 9.11.1995 that the provisions of the Act came into force and by notification dated 6.3.1997 the date on which the provisions of Chapter III of the said Act came into force in the State of Tamil Nadu. By G.O. Ms. No. 1577 Home (Courts-IV) Department dated 29.10.1997, the State Legal Services Authority was constituted and the Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid was to be dissolved. By G.O. Ms. No. 1577 Home (Courts-IV) Department dated 29.10.1997, the State Legal Services Authority was constituted and the Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid was to be dissolved. Since the status of the staff of the Board after its dissolution had to be decided, the Government after careful examination decided to accept the proposal of the Secretary of the Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid and Advice Board and directed that the cadre strength of the State Legal Services Authority was to be fixed as in Annexure I of the said order. The Government also directed that the staff shall be absorbed in the newly constituted Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority without change in their nomen- clature and existing scale of pay with effect from 1.11.1997. 2. On 3.12.2004, the then Registrar General of the High Court addressed a letter to the Chief Secretary referring to the various Government Orders, and stated that if the Letter No. 29016/Cts.IV/2001 dated 10.2.2003 stating that the pensionary benefits should be admissible to the employees only with effect from 1.11.1997 is put into effect then these employees, with whose dedicated work Legal Services Authority had carved an enviable niche in the arena of the legal services, would feel frustrated. The letter stressed the fact that the past services of the employees must be taken into consideration and that that the whole strength of the employees of the authorities in the entire State does not exceed 207. A similar letter was again addressed to the Chief Secretary on 21.2.2005. On 8.4.2005, the Government responded that this request cannot be complied with. Immediately, the writ petition was filed. The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition directing the respondents to count the past services of all permanent employees quashing the impugned letter. Against that, the Government has filed this appeal. 3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the Government has issued an order G.O. Ms. No. 1153 dated 30.11.2006 by which the Government had reviewed the prayer suo motuand directed that the past services rendered by the personnel in the erstwhile Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid and Advice Board with effect from 1.1.1985 will be taken into account for the calculation of qualifying service for pensionary benefits. The learned Government Pleader submitted that Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu. The learned Government Pleader submitted that Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu. Pension Rules clearly provided that for calculating the qualifying service, the service under non-pensionable establishment should have been on time scale of pay. These employees in the Legal Services Authority were brought on time scale of pay while they were employees of the Board only with effect from 1.1.1985 and therefore, the writ petitioners prayer has been granted as per the Rules. It was submitted that the writ petitioner has not challenged this Government Order. The learned Government Pleader also submitted that when the Government has suo motucome forward granting the relief to the aggrieved employees, the sharp comments made by the learned single Judge was not warranted. 4. The learned senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioners namely the employees of the Legal Services Authority would submit that Rule 11 cannot be put against the petitioners. Further it was submitted that two other States namely State of Andhra Pradesh as well as the Union Territory of Pondicherry had enacted Rules which provided for reckoning of the service with the Board for all practical purposes. In addition, the learned senior counsel also submitted that in similar cases of absorption of staff in Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Department, Tamil Nadu Iyal Iasai Nataka Mandram and absorption of staff, of the District Boards in Medical and Public Health Departments of the Government, the benefit of counting past services for the purposes of pension had been granted and the denial of the same to the writ petitioners would be arbitrary. It is also seen that the Governing Body comprised of His Excellency the Governor, the Hon‘ble Chief Justice as patron-in-Chief, the Hon‘ble Law Minister as patron, therefore, except for the fact the Board was registered as a society, the nature of work was the same. 5. The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority has also filed a report. The Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid and Advice Board was constituted to fulfil the obligation of providing legal aid as envisaged under Article 39-A of the Constitution of India. The State Government in discharging of its function had set up this Board and therefore, the State cannot now say that the services of the employees will not be taken into account from the date on which they entered service but only from 1.1.1985. The State Government in discharging of its function had set up this Board and therefore, the State cannot now say that the services of the employees will not be taken into account from the date on which they entered service but only from 1.1.1985. Even at the time of constitution of the Board, the staff was recruited on a full time basis and the employees were not casual workers. Initially, since sufficient fund was not available, a minimum pay of Rs. 200/- was fixed as consolidated remuneration. But from 1.4.1981, the monthly salary of the Administrative Assistants was fixed as Rs.275-25-325/-. It was increased on 6.1.1982 and again on 14.8.1985. So the Senior Administrative Assistants were on the scale of pay 4,000-100-6,000/-. 6. We are unable to understand why the State Government should not extend the pensionary benefits right from the date of employment as prayed for by the petitioner. In fact, they are bound to do that. Even at the time of absorption of the Tamil Nadu Legal Aid and Advice Board, the Government declared its intention that they should not be prejudiced with regard to their scale of pay etc. It is true that by G.O. Ms. No. 1153 dated 30.11.2006, the Government had decided suo motu to take into account the past services rendered by the personnel in the erstwhile Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid and Advice Board with effect from 1.1.1985 for the calculation of qualifying service for pensionary benefits and this Government Order has not been specifically challenged by the writ petitioner. But that will not in any way prejudice the case of the writ petitioner. The Government Order itself makes it clear that it was only pending this writ petition that the Government had issued those directions as would be clear from Paragraph No.4 of the Government Order, which reads thus: “ 4. Pending decision by the High Court, Madras in the said Writ Petition the Government reviewed the prayer suo moto and direct that the past services rendered by the personnel in the erstwhile Tamil Nadu State Legal Aid and Advice Board, with effect from 1.1.1985 will be taken into account for the calculation of qualifying service for pensionary benefits.” Therefore, if we confirm the order of the learned single Judge as we intend to do, the Government is bound to pass appropriate orders revising G.O. Ms. No. 1153 dated 30.11.2006 and granting pensionary benefits to the staff right from the date of/ employment. However, we make it clear that we are confirming the order of the learned single Judge only insofar as the direction to grant pensionary benefits to the employers right from the date on which they entered service to the Board. Considering the fact that the Government has decided to suo motureview the case, even pending decision in the writ petition, we do not think the observations made by the learned Judge about the Government Officials were necessary. 7. In the result, the writ appeal is dismissed. The Government shall pass appropriate orders revising G.O. Ms. No. 1153 dated 30.11.2006 granting relief to the writ petitioners right from the date on which they joined the service in the Board. No costs. Consequently, M.P. No.l of 2008 is also dismissed.