JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has preferred the instant Writ of Mandamus praying for issuance of order in directing the first respondent to calculate the half of non pensionable services rendered by him in Tamil Nadu Steels Limited, Arakkonam along with his pensionable service in the fourth respondent office for calculating pension as per G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance (Pension) Department dated 14.02.1996 and to pay the pensionary benefits to him from the date of his retirement. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant in Tamil Nadu Steels Limited (now under Liquidation) during 1972. He was absorbed in the said company. At the time of closure of the said company, he worked as Assistant Material Officer. The said company was closed down in 1998 by means of G.O.Ms.No.222 dated 16.6.1998 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu. According to the petitioner, he had completed 26 years of service in the said company. Later, the State Government has passed another G.O.Ms.No.524 dated 21.8.1998, in and by which, the Government had decided to absorb the employees of Tamil Nadu Steels Limited (now under Liquidation) in other Public Sector Undertakings including the State Transport Corporation and Local Bodies. 3. It is the further case of the petitioner that he was given appointment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.524 dated 21.8.1998 in Mettur Municipal Office, the fourth respondent herein, as Junior Assistant and retired on 30.6.2003 as Junior Assistant. He had rendered the services of 4 years, 3 months and 22 days in Mettur Municipal Office. The qualifying service for the eligibility of pension is 10 years and there is shortage of 5½ years. According to the petitioner, even before his retirement, the third respondent, Commissioner of Municipal Administration, Chennai has requested the concerned Authorities to pass an order, on the petitioner's pensionary benefits by calculating the services rendered in Tamil Nadu Steels Limited, Arakkonam. Even after receipt of the said letter, there was no reply from the first respondent, Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Chennai-9. 4. The Learned counsel for the petitioner urges before this court that in terms of ingredients of G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance (Pension) Department dated 14.2.1996, half of the petitioner's service in non pensionable establishment i.e., Tamil Nadu Steels Limited, Arakkonam, is to be counted along with regular services rendered in Mettur Municipality for calculating pension and if the said G.O. is applied, then the petitioner is eligible for pension. 5. 5. Advancing his argument, it is submitted by the Learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner made a representation to the respondents on 10.7.2012, narrating the above said facts and requested them to sanction pension, but the respondents although received his representation, had not chosen to sanction pension, nor given any reply. 6. At this stage, the Learned counsel for the petitioner refers to the order dated 3.7.2012 in W.P.No.11215/2012 passed by this Court between A.Chandrasekaran and the Secretary to Government and three others, wherein, in paras 5 to 7, it is observed and held as under: "5. The Government took a policy decision through G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance (Pension) Department dated 14.2.1996 and paragraphs 2 and 3 of the order reads as under, "2. The Government have examined the question of extending the concession ordered in the G.O. First read above to the case of Government employees who were borne on non-pensionable establishment and subsequently brought into pensionable establishment and have decided to count half of the service rendered under non-pensionable establishment along with service under pensionable establishment for pensionary benefits. They accordingly direct that half of the service rendered by State Government employees under non-pensionable establishment shall be allowed to be counted for pensionary benefits along with regular service under pensionable establishment subject to the following conditions: i) Service under non-pensionable establishment should have been in a job involving whole time employment. ii) The service under non pensionable establishment should have been on time scale of pay. iii) The service under non-pensionable establishment should have been continuous and followed by absorption in pensionable establishment without a break. 3. These orders shall take effect from the date of this G.O. In respect of those who retired prior to the date of this order eligible pension or revised pension, as the case may be, shall be paid from the date of this order and that there can be no claim for arrears in any case for the period upto the date of this order." 6. In view of the above Government Order, which clearly states that half of the services rendered in non-pensionable establishment is entitled to be counted along with the services rendered in pensionable establishment for pensionary benefits, the petitioner is entitled to the relief sought for. 7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. In view of the above Government Order, which clearly states that half of the services rendered in non-pensionable establishment is entitled to be counted along with the services rendered in pensionable establishment for pensionary benefits, the petitioner is entitled to the relief sought for. 7. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The first respondent is directed consider the representation of the petitioner dated 12.8.2011 and pass orders taking note of G.O.Ms.No.118 dated 14.2.1996 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed." 7. Inasmuch as the petitioner has submitted his representation dated 10.7.2012 addressed to the fourth respondent and three others, wherein he has made a request to calculate half of the services rendered by him in non pensionable establishment i.e., in Tamil Nadu Steels Limited, Arakkonam, along with services rendered in pensionable establishment i.e., in Mettur Municipality, for calculating pension, as per G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance (Pension) Department, dated 14.2.1996 and to pay him necessary pensionary benefits. Till date, the petitioner's representation dated 10.7.2012 addressed to the fourth respondent, Commissioner, Mettur Municipal Office, Mettur and other respondents, has not been considered. 8. At this stage, on a cursory perusal of the contents of G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance (Pension) Department dated 14.2.1996 issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu unerringly points out that "half of the services rendered in non-pensionable establishment is entitled to be counted along with the services rendered in pensionable establishment for pensionary benefits". 9. As such, this Court, to prevent an aberration and to promote substantial cause of justice, directs the first Respondent, Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009, to consider the petitioner's representation dated 10.7.2012, in the light of G.O.Ms.No.118 Finance (Pension) Department dated 14.2.1996, in fair, just, objective and dispassionate manner and to pass speaking and reasoned order in qualitative and quantitative terms, within six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. It is open to the first respondent to provide necessary opportunity to the petitioner (if the situation so warrants) prior to passing of the order, based on the petitioner's representation dated 10.7.2012. 10. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.