Judgment : 1. This writ petition has been filed praying that this Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant the petitioner the pensionary benefits due to him, from the date of his initial appointment, on 7.7.1976, till the date of his superannuation, on 30.9.2011. 2. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. The petitioner has stated that he had joined in service, in the Needamangalam Panchayat Union, as a Cholera Mazdoor, by an order, dated 17.8.1976. The petitioner had continued in service for more than 20 years. However, he had not been regularized in service. In such circumstances, the petitioner had moved the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, for regularization for his service, in O.A.Nos.869 of 1996, 2794 of 1999 and 5937 of 2001. The Tribunal, based on the submissions made on behalf of the respondents therein, had passed the following order:- "Now that the Commissioner has stated that there are two vacancies in the post of Office Assistants available in the Panchayat union, a direction is given to the respondents to consider the case of these applicants for appointment as Office Assistants. The applicants cannot claim it with retrospective effect. The order of appointment will come into effect from the date when the order is issued. The applications are ordered in these terms, recording the undertaking made by the respondents." Thereafter, the petitioner had been appointed as an Office Assistant, by the District Collector, Tiruvarur, by his order, dated 2.7.2009. The petitioner had retired from service, on 30.9.2011, on attaining the age of superannuation. 4. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that the service of the petitioner ought to have been regularized, from the year, 1976, when he had been appointed in service, as a Cholera Mazdoor. In such a case, the petitioner would have received pensionary benefits, for the service rendered by him, from the year, 1976, as per the pensionary rules applicable to him. However, the respondent had not paid the pensionary benefits due to the petitioner, from the year, 1976, and therefore, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition, before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. However, the respondent had not paid the pensionary benefits due to the petitioner, from the year, 1976, and therefore, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition, before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. A counter affidavit, dated 19.6.2012, had been filed on behalf of the 3rd respondent. Paragraph No.4 of the said counter affidavit reads as follows:- 4. It is submitted that Mr.A.Yogaraj the petitioner herein was appointed as Cholera Mazdoor on daily wages in the Panchayat Union and his appointment was purely temporary. No appointment order was issued to him and he was paid for the days he worked on daily wage basis. The engagement of the petitioner is purely on daily wage basis as a precautionary measure to prevent Cholera. The engagement of the petitioner as daily wage Cholera Mazdoor made prior to 1986 and did not ensure any guarantee for the permanent employment. Initially, the petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis for a period of three months [i.e. Only on winter season] as a precautionary measure to prevent Cholera and on expiry of three months, he was automatically ousted from service then and there. The services of the Cholera Mazdoors are required only during winter season and not for the whole year. It is pertinent to mention that even after 1986, the Cholera Mazdoors were appointed for 58 days only and that also only on getting prior permission from the concerned Deputy Director of Health Services and on the expiry of the 58 days, they have been terminated and they also been given re-appointment consequently with break of one or two days. The re-appointment is made according to the necessity only on getting permission from the Deputy Director of health Services. Hence, the petitioner herein has no right to claim the regularization from 7.7.1976. It is submitted that as per the guidelines issued by the Government, the petitioner was employed as Cholera Mazdoor on temporary basis i.e. Daily wages w.e.f. 7.7.1976 and he was terminated from the employment in the year 1998 as there was no need for the continuance of the employment. The petitioner and others have filed Original applications before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos.869 of 1996, 2794 of 1999, 5937 of 2001 and the Tribunal has passed orders on 18.8.2003, the operative portion of the orders is as follows: Para 3. The petitioner and others have filed Original applications before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos.869 of 1996, 2794 of 1999, 5937 of 2001 and the Tribunal has passed orders on 18.8.2003, the operative portion of the orders is as follows: Para 3. "Now that the Commissioner has stated that there are two vacancies in the post of Office Assistants available in the Panchayat union, a direction is given to the respondents to consider the case of these applicants for appointment as Office Assistants. The applicants cannot claim it with retrospective effect. The order of appointment will come into effect from the date when the order is issued. The applications are ordered in these terms, recording the undertaking made by the respondents." 6. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that the petitioner had been engaged, as a Cholera Mazdoor, only on daily wage basis, for a period of three months, during the year, 1976. Thereafter, he had been engaged only during the winter season, as a precautionary measure, to prevent cholera, and on the expiry of the limited period during which the petitioner had been engaged, he was ousted from service, automatically. 7. The learned Additional Government Pleader had further stated that, even thereafter, the Cholera Mazdoors were appointed only for a period of 58 days, on obtaining prior permission from the Deputy Director of Health Services concerned. In such circumstances, it is not open to the petitioner to claim pensionary benefits from the date of his initial appointment, during the year, 1976, despite the fact that he had been appointed as an Office Assistant, by an order of the 3rd respondent, dated 2.7.2009. Since the petitioner had retired from service, on attaining the age of superannuation, on 30.9.2011, he is not entitled to receive pensionary benefits, as prayed for by him, in the present writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed, as it is devoid of merits. 8. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents, and on perusal of the records available, it is noted that the petitioner had been appointed, as a Cholera Mazdoor, in the Needamangalam Panchayat Union, only on daily wage basis. His service, as a Cholera Mazdoor, had not been regularized by the authorities concerned. His service, as a Cholera Mazdoor, had not been regularized by the authorities concerned. However, based on the direction issued by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai, in its order, dated 18.8.2003, made in O.A.Nos.869 of 1996, 2794 of 1999 and 5937 of 2001, he had been appointed as an Office Assistant, by the order of the 3rd respondent, dated 2.7.2009. It had also been made clear that the appointment would not have any retrospective effect. Thereafter, the petitioner had retired from service, on 30.9.2011, on attaining the age of superannuation. The petitioner has not been in a position to substantiate his claim that he had been appointed on a regular basis, in a sanctioned post, as a Cholera Mazdoor, from the year, 1976. From the records available before this Court, it is clear that the petitioner had been engaged as a Cholera Mazdoor, on a daily wage basis, during the winter season, in order to prevent the occurrence of Cholera, in the area concerned. In such circumstances, this Court is not in a position to accept the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner, to direct the respondents to grant pensionary benefits to the petitioner, from the year, 1976, when he had been appointed as a Cholera Mazdoor, on a daily wage basis. As such, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed accordingly. No costs.