Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

K.Natarajan vs Government Of Tamil Nadu on 17 May, 2017

Author: M.Govindaraj

Bench: M.Govindaraj

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.05.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
W.P.Nos.12875 to 12879 of 2017

1.K.Natarajan
2.P.Annamalai
3.K.Sekar
4.B.Pachiappan
5.Sampath.A
6.H.Mohamed Bashah
7.S.Subramani
8.V.Ramalingam
9.G.Venkatachalam
10.P.Dhanapal					   ...	Petitioners in 
							          W.P.No.12875/2017

1.P.Palanisamy
2.M.Eswaran
3.M.Karippiah
4.D.Kannan
5.V.Ganapathy
6.K.Saraswathi @ Sarasu
7.T.Thirumal
8.C.Sekar
9.C.Kadhirvel
10.K.Kannan
11.C.Selvaraj
12.A.Pachiyappan
13.V.Perumal
14.G.Kuppusami					  ...  Petitioners in
							        W.P.No.12876/2017





1.C.Govindaraj
2.A.Kuppan
3.R.Munusamy
4.P.Veerasamy
5.E.Jayakumar
6.C.Anandan
7.A.Bathran
8.T.K.Rudrappan
9.G.Thiruvenkadam
10.D.Sundaram					...   Petitioners in
							       W.P.no.12877/2017


1.T.M.Babu
2.V.Loganathan
3.V.Perumal
4.M.Mani
5.M.Vellingiri
6.M.Krishnasamy
7.V.Angamuthu
8.C.Kulandiyan
9.G.Kasi
10.R.Chinnan
11.K.Pandurangan
12.G.Varadaraj
13.I.Narasimman
14.P.Dhanapal
15.S.Chezhiyan
16.J.Mariadass
17.K.Karmegam
18.S.Vadamalaiyan
19.M.Mani
20.S.Jothi
21.A.Kuppusamy
22.M.Ramadoss
23.C.Beeman
24.N.R.Aruldoss
25.N.V.Ganesan
26.A.Kasthuribai
27.S.Kannan
28.V.Annamalai
29.R.V.Ambika
30.S.Kasinathan					...  Petitioners in
							     W.P.No.12878/2017


1.P.Kuppusamy
2.M.Eattu
3.C.Kamaraj
4.Narayanasamy
5.A.Kathiresan
6.C.Palani
7.R.Mohanam
8.N.Samikannu
9.G.Anniyappan
10.M.Venkatesan
11.M.Lakshmanan
12.S.Vallinayagam
13.G.Deivanayagam
14.V.Gopal
15.M.Ramasamy
16.A.Kalaiselvi
17.M.Gopalakrishnan
18.M.Saratha
19.S.Anthonysamy					...   Petitioners in
							      W.P.No.12879/2017

					      
Vs.

1.Government of Tamil Nadu,
   rep. by its Secretary,
   Environment and Forest Department,
   Fort St. George,
   Chennai  600 090.

2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
   Panagal Building,
   Saidapet, Chennai  600 015.			...  Respondents			


Prayer : Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioners as regular time scale Forest Watchers taking into account of their seniority and qualification, on par with their juniors in the light of the orders passed in W.P.No.15561 of 2006 dated 10.03.2008, W.A.No.690 of 2008 dated 13.10.2009, W.P.No.23374 of 2008 dated 30.10.2009, W.A.No.607 of 2010 dated 20.03.2010 and proceedings of the second respondent dated 07.01.2011 and confer all consequential benefits.

			For Petitioners	:  Mr.S.Mani
			For Respondents	:  Mr.N.Inbanathan
						   Govt. Advocate (Forest)	
					

			          	COMMON ORDER				

By consent, the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

2. Mr.N.Inbanathan, learned Government Advocate (Forest) takes notice for the respondents.

3. Heard both sides.

4. The petitioners were appointed on daily wages in the Forest Department and subsequently, their services were regularised as Forest Watcher but not on par with their juniors. However, the juniors of the petitioners who are able to read and write and acquired SSLC qualification were promoted earlier than petitioners as per the qualification fixed by the G.O.Ms.No.332, Environment and Forest Department, dated 22.12.1994. Thereafter, G.O.Ms.No.64, Environment and Forest Department, dated 08.03.1999 was issued restoring the qualification of ability to read and write instead of SSLC. Though the petitioners were promoted as Forest Watchers / Forest Guards as the case may be, the regularisation of the services of the petitioners as Forest Watcher on par with their juniors has not been done.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the issue is already covered by the decision in the Writ Petition filed by similarly placed persons in W.P.No.15561 of 2006 dated 10.03.2008, which was confirmed in W.A.No.690 of 2008 dated 13.10.2009.

6. Considering the fact that the petitioners juniors were already regularised even before the petitioners could get regularised as per the decision referred to above, it is appropriate to direct the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioners on par with their juniors as Forest Watchers within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioners are entitled to only regularisation from the date on which the juniors were regularised and they are not entitled to any monetary benefits from that date.

7. With the above direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.



									17.05.2017
Index      : Yes/No
Internet  : Yes/No
bbr

To

1.The Secretary,
   Environment and Forest Department,
   Fort St. George,
   Chennai  600 090.

2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
   Panagal Building,
   Saidapet, Chennai  600 015.















M.GOVINDARAJ ,J.


bbr













W.P. Nos.12875 to 12879 of 2017
















17.05.2017

http://www.judis.nic.in