Madras High Court
G.Rajendran … vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 10 December, 2021
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUD9ICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 10.12.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
and WMP No.4655 of 2021
G.Rajendran … Petitioner
Vs
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
rep. By its Principal Secretary,
Environment and Forest Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
Head of Forest Force,
No.1, Geenis Road, Panagal Building,
Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
3. The District Forest Officer,
Dharmapuri Forest Division, Harur,
Dharmapuri District.
… Respondents
PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus call for the records of the
second respondent order made in C.No.S2/18396/2015 dated 13.11.2019 and
quash the same, consequently directing the respondents to regularize the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/10
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
petitioner service as driver in the regular post from the date of completion of
ten years, ie., 01.07.2006 with all consequential service and monetary benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ponmozhi
For Respondents : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fazal
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner was appointed as a Plot Watcher on 01.04.1995 by direct
recruitment. He was thereafter posted as Driver at Dharmapuri Forest Range in
the Dharmapuri Forest Division. According to the petitioner, the Government
has issued G.O.Ms.No.95 Environment and Forest (FRII) Department dated
07.08.2009 regularising the services of the Plot Watchers/Social Forestry
worker on completion of 10 years of service on daily wages in the
supernumerary post.
2. The petitioner, who was also working for number of years
continuously had made a representation for his absorption in the regular time
scale of pay. However, the representation came to be rejected by the second
respondent on 07.10.2008, as against which a Writ Petition in W.P.No.27282
of 2008 has been filed by the petitioner. This Court, vide order dated
04.04.2013 directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner along
with others on the basis of the recommendations of the third respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
However, the claim of the petitioner was once again rejected by the Department
on 09.05.2013.
3. The above rejection order was once again put to challenge by the
petitioner in W.P.No.20035 of 2013 and the same was disposed on 10.07.2014
directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner as per the
Government Orders in force. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, the
District Forest Officer had sent a proposal to the second respondent to consider
the petitioner's claim for regularisation as driver by letter dated 09.12.2014.
While his representation was kept pending for passing orders, similarly placed
persons like the petitioner herein had been conferred with the benefit of
regularisation. According to the petitioner, number of persons have
approached this Court with similar prayers and those Writ Petitions have been
allowed and the orders of this Court have been implemented by the
Department.
4. The Writ Petitioner was once again constrained to file another Writ
Petition in W.P.No.11355 of 2015 seeking issuance of writ of mandamus
directing the respondents to regularize his service as driver in the 3 rd
respondent division on completion of 10 years on par with other similarly
placed persons. This Court vide order dated 05.03.2019 disposed the said Writ
Petition directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner once
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
again within a period of eight weeks. In pursuance of the latest directions of
this Court, the claim of the petitioner came to be rejected again vide order
dated 13.11.2019, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present Writ
Petition.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the
issue of regularisation of services of employees like the petitioner is no more
res integra and has been covered by numerous decisions of this Court,
confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The learned counsel, during the
course of her submission would refer to first of the decisions passed by this
Court as early as on 01.12.2016 in W.P.(MD) No.11106 of 2013 in the case of
one Murugan, who was working as a Driver in the respondent department. A
learned single Judge of this Court has allowed the Writ Petition filed by him
and directed regularisation of the service from the date of completion of 10
years with all benefits. As against the order of the learned single Judge, a Writ
Appeal was filed in W.A.(MD) No.686 of 2017 and the Division Bench
dismissed the same vide order dated 12.07.2017. As against which, a Special
Leave Petition was filed and the same was also dismissed by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court on 04.09.2018.
6. The learned counsel would also refer to another order passed by this
Court on 04.09.2017 in W.P.Nos.19456 to 19458 of 2013, wherein, after
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
following the earlier orders passed by this Court, the Writ Petitions were
allowed, as could be seen from the operative portion of the order reading as
follows:
6. Upon notice, learned Additional Government Pleader entered
appearance and submitted that the petitioners herein are not entitled to
regularisation since they had not completed ten years of service as on
01.01.2006, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.22 of P & A R Department, dated
01.01.2006.
7. At this, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would
submit that the said objection was also raised in respect of the other
driver who was approached this Court earlier in W.P. (MD) No.11106 of
2013 and this Court in the said order dated 01.12.2016, had repulsed and
over ruled such argument stating that the petitioner therein was entitled
to regularisation on completion of ten years of service from the date of his
initial appointment. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further
submit the order passed by the learned Single Judge was confirmed in
W.A.(MD) No.686 of 2017, vide order dated 12.07.2017.
8. Since the petitions herein are squarely covered by the order
passed by this Court as aforesaid, this Court cannot take a different view
in the matter. Moreover, the objection raised by the learned counsel
appearing for the respondents was considered and over ruled and
therefore, the similar objection which is raised by the learned counsel for
the respondents cannot not be entertained as being valid and substantive.
9. In view of the above submissions, this Court has no hesitation
in allowing these writ petitions and the impugned order passed by the
first respondent dated 09.05.2013, insofar as the two petitioners are
concerned, are set aside and all the petitioners are directed to be
regularised from the date of completion of ten years from the date of
initial appointment with all attendant and consequential benefits. The
direction shall be complied with by the first respondent within a period of
two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. With the above direction, the writ petitions are allowed. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
7. Subsequently, another order was passed on 15.12.2016 in
W.P.No.22740 of 2010 allowing similar claim. As against the said order, Writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
Appeal in W.A.No.2796 of 2018 has been filed, which was dismissed by the
Division Bench vide order dated 02.01.2019.
8. The learned counsel would also refer to two Government Orders, viz.,
G.O.Ms.No.03, Environment and Forest Department dated 11.01.2019 and
G.O.Ms.No.48, Environment and Forest Department dated 27.05.2019, wherein
orders of this Court have been implemented and the services of the petitioners
therein were regularised.
9. The learned counsel finally would submit that even recently in a batch
of Writ Appeals in W.A.Nos.391 of 2020 etc. batch, vide order dated
13.03.2020 a Division Bench of this Court disposed all the Writ Appeals as
follows:
4. Thus, the correctness or otherwise of the directions for
regularization have already been tested by a Division Bench and the order of
the learned Single Judge has been confirmed. In the aforesaid three appeals,
the State has preferred a Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court, being
S.L.P.(C).No.39233 of 2019, in which notice has been issued on 29.11.2019.
5. The learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, very fairly
states that the issue raised before the Apex Court is being pressed insofar as
it relates to the date of applicability of the regularization inasmuch as all
such employees are claiming regularization from the date of the initial
appointment and other benefits, whereas they have been given the benefits
from the date of regularization after being regularized.
6. His contention, therefore, is that the issue as to from which date will they
get the benefit of regularization, is the issue engaging the attention of the
Apex Court.
7. We have considered the submissions raised and we find no reason to differ
from the view taken by the Division Bench while confirming the judgment of
the learned Single Judge, issuing directions for regularization. But, insofar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
as the date from which such regularization will be given effect to being sub-
judice before the Apex Court, we direct that the respondents/petitioners shall
be regularized and so far as the date of regularization is concerned, the
same will be governed by the outcome of the judgment of the Apex Court.
8. The learned Additional Advocate General, on instructions, states that the
respondents/petitioners will be regularized and the regularization orders
will be issued within four weeks from the date of production of a copy of this
order. We record this and direct accordingly.
9. The Writ Appeals stand disposed of. No costs. Connected civil
miscellaneous petitions are closed
10. In pursuance of the aforesaid directions of the Division Bench,
recently, G.O.Ms.No.8 Environment and forest (FR2-II) Department dated
22.01.2021 was issued regularising the services of the petitioners in the
aforesaid Writ Petitions. According to the learned counsel, since the services of
all the daily wage drivers have been regularised after repeated orders/directions
of this Court, the present petitioner's case, which is identical to the case of the
petitioners in the above mentioned Writ Petitions/Writ Appeal may be allowed
on similar lines.
11. Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fazal, learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents has no quarrel with the decisions of this Court as
mentioned above consistently granting the benefit of regularisation of the
persons working in the respondent Department like the petitioner. The learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
Additional Government Pleader would graciously admit that the issue raised in
this Writ Petition is also covered by the above decisions.
12. In view of the fact that ....... decisions granting relief to the similarly
placed persons like the petitioner herein with respect to the same ......., the
present Writ Petition is also allowed and the impugned order in
C.No.S2/18396/2015 dated 13.11.2019 is set aside.
13. The respondents are directed to to regularise the services of the
petitioner on par with the other similarly placed persons whose services have
been regularised with all consequential and monetary benefits as given to other
persons.
14. The respondents shall pass appropriate orders in this regard within a
period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No
costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
10.12.2021
sl
Index:Yes/no
speaking/non-speaking order
To
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
rep. By its Principal Secretary,
Environment and Forest Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
2. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
Head of Forest Force,
No.1, Geenis Road, Panagal Building,
Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.
3. The District Forest Officer,
Dharmapuri Forest Division, Harur,
Dharmapuri District.
V.PARTHIBAN,J.
Sl
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
and WMP No.4655 of 2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No.4085 of 2021
10.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
