N.Pachayappan vs The Principal Chief Conservator ...

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 15065 Mad
Judgement Date : 8 September, 2022

Madras High Court
N.Pachayappan vs The Principal Chief Conservator ... on 8 September, 2022
                                                                        W.P.No.21934 of 2010

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                  Dated : 08.09.2022

                                                       Coram

                                    The Honourable Mr.Justice K.KUMARESH BABU

                                               W.P.No.21934 of 2010
                                               and M.P.No.1 of 2010

                    N.Pachayappan
                                                                              ...Petitioner
                                                      Versus
                    1.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest,
                      Panagal Maligai,
                      Saidapet, Chennai – 15.

                    2.The Deputy Conservator of Forest,
                      Afforestation Division,
                      Thiruvannamali District.

                    3.The Forest Ranger,
                      A Forestation Range,
                      Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District.

                    4.The Extension Officer,
                      (Social Forestry),
                      West Arni Block,
                      Thiruvannamalai District.

                    5.Annamalai,
                      President of Tamil Nadu Afforestation Project,
                      Padaivedu, Pudur Village,
                      Polur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.
                                                                           ...Respondents



                    1/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                 W.P.No.21934 of 2010




                              Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                    praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the
                    records of impugned order in Na.Ka.No.L.L1/5361/2010 dated 15.07.2010
                    from the file of first respondent and quash the same and directing the
                    respondents to give benefits to petitioner as per G.O.(Ms).No.64 dated
                    08.03.1999 and G.O.(Ms).No.95 Environment and Forest Department dated
                    07.08.2009.

                              For Petitioner                :      Mr.P.Ganapathy

                              For Respondents – 1 to 4      :      Mr.T.Chezhiyan,
                                                                   Additional Government Pleader

                              For Respondent – 5            :      No Appearance



                                                         ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.L.L1/5361/2010 dated 15.07.2010, rejecting the representation made by the petitioner seeking appointment pursuant to the Government Orders made in G.O.Ms.No.64 Environment & Forest Department dated 08.03.1999 and G.O.Ms.No.95 Environment & Forest Department dated 07.08.2009.

2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.21934 of 2010

2. According to the petitioner, he has joined as plot watcher in the year 1985 and engaged in the social forestry work under the control of fourth respondent from 1985 to 1996. Subsequently, he was transferred to Forest Department in the year 1997 and working in the third respondent Range, Cheyyar circle, from 01.01.1997 to 31.12.2006. Thereafter, he was transferred to the office of the fifth respondent. He was working in the Forest Department for 25 years only on daily wages basis. Aggrieved over the same, he has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.168 of 2010, seeking to direct the respondents 1 & 2 to appoint him in regular basis as per G.O.Ms.No.64 dated 08.03.1999 and G.O.Ms.No.95 Environment and Forest Department dated 07.08.2009. This Court vide order dated 19.04.2010, disposed of the said writ petition by observing as follows:

“6. Keeping the submissions made on either side, while following the judgment delivered by this Court in batch of Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.265 of 2009 etc., dated 23.03.2010, I hereby direct the petitioner to place the details of service rendered by him to the first respondent including to break in service, so that cumulatively, if they are satisfied with the requirement of ten years service as per G.O.Ms.No.95 dated 07.08.2009, the petitioner could be considered for absorption. The petitioner is directed to furnish the details of service within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of such particulars, first 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.21934 of 2010 respondent shall pass orders after the completion of entire exercise within a period of another ten weeks.

7. In the light of the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.”

3. As per the direction issued by this Court in W.P.No.168 of 2010 dated 19.04.2010, the petitioner made a representation dated 28.05.2010, however, the first respondent has rejected the same by holding that the petitioner has not produced any material whatsoever to claim the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.64 Environment & Forest Department dated 08.03.1999 and G.O.Ms.No.95 Environment & Forest Department dated 07.08.2009 since the said Government Orders would only enure to the benefit of the persons working in the Forest Department. Therefore, left with no other alternative, the petitioner has knocked the doors of this Court with the present writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's name could be considered for appointment as he had been continuously working in a place which was under the control of the Forest Department.

4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.21934 of 2010

5. Per Contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 submitted that the seniority list was drawn by the Forest Department only as per the Government Orders. The petitioner's name did not find place in the said seniority list, because, his initial appointment was under the Rural Development Department and not under the Forest Department. So, the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.64 Environment & Forest Department dated 08.03.1999 and G.O.Ms.No.95 Environment & Forest Department dated 07.08.2009 could not be extended to the petitioner.

6. The case of the respondents is that only persons whose names were listed in the seniority list pursuant to the initial Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.64 Environment & Forest Department dated 08.03.1999, would be entitled for appointment to the supernumerary post of Plot Watcher. Since the petitioner's name was not found in the said seniority list, he would not be entitled for appointment to the said post.

7. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to G.O.Ms.No.202 Environment & Forest Department dated 18.12.2013. A bare perusal of G.O.Ms.No.202 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.21934 of 2010 Environment & Forest Department dated 18.12.2013 would show that the Government after considering the recommendation of the first respondent, had considered the case of 243 persons whose names have not been included in the seniority list, though they had worked under the Forest Department for more than 10 years and directed appointment to them. It is to be noted that the names of aforesaid 243 persons were considered for appointment as per the direction of this Court. Therefore, the learned counsel prayed this Court that the case of the petitioner may also be considered in the light of G.O.Ms.No.202 Environment & Forest Department dated 18.12.2013.

8. I have considered the arguments made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

9. Considering the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.202 Environment & Forest Department dated 18.12.2013, I am of the opinion that the first respondent would consider the case of the petitioner since the petitioner has been continuously working under the Forest Department, even though he was appointed by the Rural Development Department. 6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.21934 of 2010

10. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the petitioner to submit a fresh representation comprising his full service particulars regarding his working period in the Forest Department before the first respondent along with a copy of this order, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such representation being made, the first respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

11. This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.


                                                                                       08.09.2022
                    mrr

                    Index         : Yes/No

                    Speaking Order (or) Non-Speaking Order




                    7/8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              W.P.No.21934 of 2010




                                                                       K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

                                                                                             mrr

                    To

1.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai – 15.

2.The Deputy Conservator of Forest, Afforestation Division, Thiruvannamali District.

3.The Forest Ranger, A Forestation Range, Cheyyar, Thiruvannamalai District.

4.The Extension Officer, (Social Forestry), West Arni Block, Thiruvannamalai District.

5.Annamalai, President of Tamil Nadu Afforestation Project, Padaivedu, Pudur Village, Polur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

W.P.No.21934 of 2010 08.09.2022 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis