Judgment :- 1. The petitioner was appointed as Part-Time Hindi Pandit in the Government Upper Primary School, Thirupathisaram, and thereafter appointed, as full-time Hindi Pandit. In the year 1968, on the introduction of the second language formula, the post of Hindi Pandit was abolished. The petitioner, along with other Hindi Pandit, was posted as untrained Hindi Pandi with effect from 16.08.1968. 2. The petitioner was sent as in service candidate for Secondary Grade Teacher's Training course in April 1970. The petitioner successfully completed training, therefore, became eligible to hold the post of Secondary Grade Assistant. 3. Though the petitioner was qualified Secondary Grade Assistant from April 1970, it was only with effect from 1978, that petitioner was given increment. The petitioner, thus, was denied 8 increments. 4. The case of petitioner is that while declining the increments to the petitioner, the other similarly situated Hindi Pandits, were granted regular increments, and by taking into account total service, were given selection grade and special grade. The Chief Educational Officer informed the petitioner, that the case for grant of increments, was referred to the 2nd respondent, but no order was passed by respondent no.2. 5. The further case of petitioner is, that on account of non grant of 8 increments for the temporary service, her pension has been wrongly fixed, therefore, she is entitled to fixation of salary, after grant of 8 increments and also for refixation of pension. 6. In reply to the question of delay and laches, in approaching this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends, that as the petitioner is drawing lesser pension every month, it gives a recurring cause of action to petitioner. 7. The petitioner, in support, that petitioner was entitled to regular increments, has placed reliance on Rule 10(bb) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules, which reads as under: "(bb) A person fully qualified under the rules to hold a post born on the cadre of a service, class or category, who has rendered continuous temporary service shall be eligible to draw annual increments in the scale of pay for the post, subject to the condition that the rules do not prescribe any special qualification to be acquired or test to be passed as a condition precedent to the drawal of such increments or the increment is not denied as a measure of specific punishment. In the case of the unqualified persons, the temporary service rendered by them shall be allowed to count for increment from the date on which they become fully qualified to hold that post." 8. This Rule was brought enforced on 01.01.1955, but was omitted from rules vide G.O.Ms.No.21, P & AR(S) dated 23rd, January 1996. 9. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, is that the petitioner is governed by the rule before amendment, as the period for which increment has been denied for the temporary service is between 01.05.1970 and 31.08.1978. 10. The writ was admitted in 2002, but no counter has been filed till date. The writ petition is opposed by the respondents, by contending that the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of increment, as the increment is granted to an employee in regular service and not before induction in the cadre. 11. The writ is also opposed on the ground, that necessary parties have not been impleaded as party respondent to this writ. 12. On consideration, I find no force in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the State. It is the duty of State to pay pension to the employee, therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner is not entitled to the relief for want of necessary parties. The stand of respondents, that increment is granted only on regular service, cannot be sustained, as the rule in force at the time of temporary service of petitioner clearly stipulated, that qualified temporary employees were also entitled to the grant of annual increment. 13. The claim of petitioner is squarely covered by the Rules, then in force. The omission of rule in 1996 cannot take away the accrued right of an employee under the rules. The writ also cannot be said to suffer from delay and laches, as payment of less pension gives recurring cause of action. 14. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed. The writ in the nature of Mandamus is issued, directing the respondents to grant 8 increments to the petitioner for the temporary service rendered by petitioner, and refix her salary and pension in accordance with law. 15. However, the petitioner shall be entitled to arrears with effect from February, 1999, i.e. 3 years 2 months prior to filing of writ petition. 16. 15. However, the petitioner shall be entitled to arrears with effect from February, 1999, i.e. 3 years 2 months prior to filing of writ petition. 16. The refixation of salary and pension of petitioner be completed within 6 months of the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. No costs.