Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.37 seconds)
Documents citing S.Gnanasekaran vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 November, 2021

Michale Raj vs State Rep By on 7 July, 2023

5.2. Further he had also relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Gnanasekaran Vs. State rep by the Deputy Superintendent of 11/37 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.R.C.Nos.1351 and 1832 of 2023 Police, EOW in Crl.O.P.No.16024 of 2023, in which, it has been held that it is trite law that while considering the statutory bail, the Court does not go into the merits of the case and the Court merely takes into consideration the fact as to whether the accused is in detention for 60 days or 90 days, as the case may be, and the final report has not been filed, and the Court recognizes the indefeasible right given to the accused person and release him on bail, if the accused person is prepared to and does furnish bail. In this case, the filing of incomplete/defective charge sheet by the respondent cannot scuttled petitioner’s right of statutory bail. He further submitted that the Court had committed a blatant mistake by taking cognizance based on the defective/incomplete charge sheet.
Madras High Court Cites 39 - Cited by 0 - N Kumar - Full Document

R.Arumugam vs The Secretary To Government on 7 July, 2022

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents objected the said contention by stating that the issues regarding regularisation of Sanitary Workers appointed in Municipalities on consolidated pay was decided by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of S.Dhanasekaran & 24 Others Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu reported in [2013 (6) CTC 593]. The Full Bench has held that the employees are not entitled for retrospective regularisation from the date of completion of one year of service or three years of service. Again, a Review Petition was filed and the Full Bench of this Court allowed the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Review Petition and granted the benefit of retrospective regularisation on Page 4 of 12 W.P.Nos.7026 and 7027 of 2014 completion of three years of service as per the Government orders passed. The said judgment of the Full Bench in the Review Petition was taken by way of Appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and a stay has been granted and the appeal is now pending before the Apex Court of India.
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - S M Subramaniam - Full Document

P.Nataraj vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 8 December, 2022

Subsequently, the 4th respondent, vide his impugned proceedings, dated 29.05.2016, has returned the proposal stating that the petitioner's services in the cadre of Typist should be regularized only on 23.02.2006 as per G.O.Ms.No.166, Municipal and Water Supply Department, dated 31.12.2014. The petitioner contended that his service was regularized on 10.03.2001 and was brought under Time Scale of Pay. Hence, the reason in the impugned order is unwarranted. The petitioner further contended that G.O.Ms.No.166, Municipal and Water Supply Department, dated 31.12.2014, was issued only in furtherance of the Hon’ble Full Bench Judgment of this Court made in the case of S.Dhanasekaran & 24 Others Vs Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary & Others reported in 2013 (6) CTC 593. The said G.O. will apply only in respect of the persons whose service was not regularized whereas in the petitioner's service was already regularized. Hence, 4/16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.13638 of 2016 G.O.Ms.No.166, Municipal and Water Supply Department, dated 31.12.2014, has no application.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S Srimathy - Full Document

For Appellants In Mr. P.H.Arvind ... vs M. Rani

25 In S. Dhanasekaran (supra), a Full Bench of this Court, on reference, with regard to regularisation of services of employees of Municipalities and Municipal Corporations appointed under G.O. Ms.No.101 dated 30.04.1997 and G.O. Ms.No.71 dated 05.05.1998 of Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department in the light of G.O.Ms.No.21 dated 23.02.2006 of the same department, considered the fixation of cut-off date for regularisation of sanitary workers appointed on consolidated pay and held as under:
Madras High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - S K Agnihotri - Full Document

M.R.Ramesh vs The Commissioner

15. Any regularization will come into effect only from the date of granting regularization and the same had been held by the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court rendered in S.Dhanasekaran v. Government of Tamil Nadu reported in 2013 (6) CTC 593, wherein it has been held categorically held that regularization will take effect from the date of granting regularization. The Judgment of Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court has “Those sanitary workers, who were appointed as per G.O.Ms.No.101, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 30.04.1997 or absorbed as per G.O.Ms.No.71, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 05.05.1998, are all governed by G.O.Ms.No.21, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 23.02.2006, in respect of their regularization in service and such regularisation shall take effect only from 23.02.2006 and not from the date on which they had completed three years of service from the date of their initial entry into service” The issue was re-considered by another Hon’ble Full Bench in a Review Application in R.A.No.87 of 2014 wherein the review was allowed reversing the view originally taken. As against the same the State had filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court and obtained an order of stay on 14.08.2017. However as on date the proposition of law is whenever any G.O. has granted 16 of 16 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)No.18883 of 2018 regularization within a prescribed period as given in G.O.Ms.No.71 Municipal Administration & Water Supply (MAWS) Department, dated 05.05.1998, then the daily wager is entitled to regularization on the date prescribed under the G.O. It is pertinent to state that in G.O.Ms.No.71 the regularization is granted on completion of three years provided the person had completed satisfactory service during the period of three years. If such period is not stated, then the regularization is on the date of passing G.O. granting regularization. In the present case the regularization was granted through proceedings dated 04.12.2015 and hence the petitioners are entitled to regularization and the consequential salary, service benefits etc. from 04.12.2015.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S Srimathy - Full Document
1