Madras High Court
The Secretary To Government Of Tamil ... vs A.Rajendran on 10 June, 2016
Author: M.V.Muralidaran
Bench: Huluvadi G.Ramesh, M.V.Muralidaran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.6.2016
CORAM
THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH
AND
THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN
Writ Appeal No.635 of 2016
1. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu
Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department
Fort St. George, Chennai 600 009.
2. The Director of Town Panchayat
Kuralagam Buildings
Chennai 108.
3. The Executive Officer
Thedavur Town Panchayat
Salem District. .. Appellants
Vs.
1. A.Rajendran
2. T.Sakthivel
3. M.Pasupathi
4. K.Koothan .. Respondents
-----
Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent filed against the order dated 25.6.2013 made in W.P.No.7417 of 2013 on the file of this Court.
-----
For Appellants : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan, Spl.G.P.
For Respondents : Mr.V.Vijayashankar
-----
J U D G M E N T
(Delivered by Huluvadi G.Ramesh,J) This is an appeal filed by the Government challenging the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 25.6.2013 made in W.P.No.7417 of 2013, directing the respondents herein to regularize the services of the respondents herein on completion of three years from the date on which they were appointed on consolidated pay into regular time scale of pay within a period of three months.
2. Heard the learned Special Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the respondents.
3. The respondents were appointed as Sweepers on 29.01.1998 in the Town Panchayat on consolidated pay and they were regularised with effect from 26.3.2006, by order dated 27.7.2006. Therefore, the respondents made a representation to the respondents seeking regularisation on completion of three years of service in consolidated pay as per the G.O.Ms.No.199, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 12.8.1997. As no orders were passed on the said representation, the respondents filed a writ petition in W.P.No.7417 of 2013 and the same was allowed as prayed for. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants are before this Court.
4. According to the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants, when the appellants were taking steps to regularise the respondents on their completion of three years of service, the Government imposed a ban for filling up vacant posts by G.O.Ms.No.212, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 29.11.2001. The said ban was lifted by G.O.Ms.No.14, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 07.02.2006. Thereafter, the Government issued G.O.(Pt)No.60, Rural Development and Panchayat Department, dated 23.6.2006 sanctioning the posts of Sanitary Workers. Pursuant to the said G.O., the appellants regularised the services of the respondents with effect from 23.6.2006. Therefore, the learned Special Government Pleader submits that the impugned order, which has not taken note of the Government Orders that were in force during the relevant time, has to be set aside.
5. A perusal of the order of the learned single Judge would show that the learned single Judge had taken note of an order passed in a similar writ petition, namely W.P.No.25620 of 2006 dated 17.9.2008, which was confirmed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.47 of 2010 by judgment dated 23.6.2010 and by the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.26605 of 2010 and only thereafter, directed the respondents to regularise the services of the respondents on completion of three years of service from the date of their appointment.
6. In The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu & Others v. M.Rani [2015 WLR 791], where a challenge was made to the order of the learned single Judge holding that the petitioners therein are entitled to regularisation of their service on completion of three years from date of initial appointment, a Division Bench of this Court held as follows:
"27. As we have observed in the preceding paragraphs, the respondents were informed at the time of their appointment that their appointment was on consolidated pay, subject to pay enhancement by 10% every year initially for a period of one year at a time, subject to renewal on assessment/review after a period of three years. It was also indicated to the respondents that their cases may be considered for regularization on assessment of their performance. Thus, it is not a case of appointment on consolidated pay or daily wages simplicitor. Albeit appointment was of temporary nature, however, that was subject to regular assessment and probable regularization on completion of three years automatically, without consideration of their performance. On assessment/review, if it is found that their performance is satisfactory, they are entitled to be granted time scale on regular basis.
28. We are not delving into other questions, viz., res judicata and also regularization of ad hoc/daily wage employees, as the same are not relevant and necessary in the contextual background of the facts involved in these cases. Thus, we are not referring to and discussing all the decisions cited by the learned counsel appearing for the parties on different issues, which are not germane for adjudication of the issue involved herein.
29. Resultantly, for the reasoning and analysis made hereinabove, the appeals are partly allowed to the extent that the respondents are entitled to consideration for grant of time scale on regular basis on the basis of performance assessment to be done on completion of three years and in the event, the performance of the respondents, is found satisfactory, they are entitled to regularization on completion of three years, with all consequential monetary benefits. Costs made easy. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed."
7. In the light of the decision of the Division Bench cited above, this Court is of the view that the respondents are entitled to be regularised on completion of three years of service and that the order of the learned single Judge has to be upheld.
8. In view of the above, the writ appeal is dismissed, confirming the order of the learned single Judge. It is made clear that the respondents are entitled to be considered for the grant of time scale on regular basis on performance assessment basis and if their performance is found satisfactory, they are entitled to be regularised on their completion of three years of service, with all consequential monetary benefits. There shall no order as to costs. CMP No.8281 of 2016 is closed.
Index : Yes/No (H.G.R.J.) (M.V.M.J.)
Internet: Yes/No 10.6.2016
kpl
HULUVADI G.RAMESH,J,
and
M.V.MURALIDARAN,J.
kpl
W.A.No.635 of 2016.
10.6.2016.