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

E.Balaraman vs The Secretary on 28 January, 2014

Author: T.Raja

Bench: T.Raja

       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED  : 28.01.2014

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

W.P.No.2352 of 2011 

E.Balaraman				..	Petitioner 

-vs-

1. The Secretary
    Health & Family Welfare 
    Government of Tamil Nadu
    Secretariat
    Fort St.George

2. The Secretary 
    Personnel & Administrative Reforms
    Government of Tamil Nadu
    Secretariat
    Fort St.George

3. The Director of Medical Education 
    Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010

4. The Principal
    Chengalpattu Medical College
    Chengalpattu				..	Respondents

	Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner who worked as Telephone Attendant with the fourth respondent and further direct the respondents to pay the regularised salary from the date of joining (29.3.1976) till the date of superannuation (31.12.2008) along with all benefits, perks, allowances, bonus and other benefits to which he was entitled as a regular employee.

	For Petitioner	::	Mr.S.L.Sudarsanam 

	For Respondents	::	Mr.S.V.Durai Solaimalai
				Additional Government Pleader 
ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed by Mr.E.Balaraman seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to direct the respondents herein to regularise his service as Telephone Attendant in the fourth respondent office with a further direction to the respondents to pay the regularised salary from the date of joining till the date of superannuation along with all benefits, perks, allowances, bonus and other benefits to which he was entitled to as a regular employee.

2. Heard the learned counsel on both sides.

3. The petitioner, having possessed S.S.L.C., qualification, registered his name with the employment exchange, Chengalpattu. In view of the seniority enjoyed by the petitioner, he was offered a job in the Chengalpattu Medical College as Telephone Attendant and he joined the said post on 29.3.76. After continuously serving in the said post, he reached the age of superannuation and retired from service on 31.12.2008 after putting in 32 long years of service. Unfortunately, in spite of the recommendation made by the fourth respondent, the Principal of Chengalpattu Medical College in Lr.No.8822/N3/08 dated 25.8.2008 to the third respondent, the Director of Medical Education and the Director of Medical Education also in his Lr.No.72688/N4/08 dated 11/22.9.2008, had forwarded the said recommendation to the first respondent, the Secretary, Health and Family Welfare for regularising the services of the petitioner on the ground that he had put in 32 long years of service as Telephone Attendant, the said recommendations were not considered. Although the said recommendations were made by the third and fourth respondents when the petitioner was in service, till the petitioner reached the age of superannuation, no order in his favour for regularisation was passed. Finally, the petitioner retired from service as temporary Telephone Attendant and after several representations made by the petitioner also did not yield any fruitful result, the petitioner has come to this Court.

4. Although no counter affidavit is filed by the respondents, in my view, no counter affidavit is also required to be filed in the light of the recommendations made by the third and fourth respondents, namely, the Principal of Chengalpattu Medical College and the Director of Medical Education. A close reading of the recommendations made by the Principal of Chengalpattu Medical College and the Director of Medical Education for regularising the services of the petitioner as Telephone Attendant clearly go to show that the petitioner's services should have been regularised, since he had put in 32 years of long and continuous service. The second significant aspect compelling this Court to issue a direction to the respondents is that when the petitioner registered his name in the employment exchange, Chengalpattu after passing the S.S.L.C. Examination, he was sponsored through the employment exchange to the said post. But, unfortunately, even after the sponsorship made by the employment exchange, Chengalpattu to the fourth respondent-Medical College to the post of Telephone Attendant, I do not find any reason for not regularising the services of the petitioner by the first respondent. In any event, when the fourth respondent had already made his recommendation mentioning that the petitioner was recruited through the employment exchange and also had put in 32 years of long and continuous service, this Court has no hesitation to direct the first respondent to accept the recommendation and pass appropriate orders regularising the services of the petitioner along with the pensionary benefits to which he was entitled to, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

Index   : yes/no					    28.01.2014
Internet: yes

ss
To
1. The Secretary
    Health & Family Welfare 
    Government of Tamil Nadu
    Secretariat, Fort St.George
    Chennai 600 009

2. The Secretary 
    Personnel & Administrative Reforms
    Government of Tamil Nadu
    Secretariat,  Fort St.George
    Chennai 600 009

3. The Director of Medical Education 
    Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010

4. The Principal
    Chengalpattu Medical College
    Chengalpattu
T.RAJA, J.

ss








W.P.No.2352 of 2011









28.01.2014