Madras High Court
A.Nazar Basha vs The Secretary To Government on 22 February, 2021
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117, 17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117, 17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
and
M.P.Nos.1 to 1 of 2013
A.Nazar Basha ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17114 of 2013
A.Gnanasekaran ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17115 of 2013
S.Govindaraj ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17116 of 2013
K.Rajendiran ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17117 of 2013
R.Babu ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17118 of 2013
B.Anandaraj ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17119 of 2013
G.Mathiazhan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.17120 of 2013
Vs
1.The Secretary to Government,
M.A.& W.S.Department,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Commissioner,
Ambur Municpality,
Ambur – 635 802,
Vellore District. ... Respondents in all W.Ps
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117, 17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
Prayer in W.P.No.17114 of 2013: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call
for the records relating to 3rd respondent proceedings Na.Ka.No.
2667/2005/C1 dated 27.02.2006 and quash the same in so far as
regularisation of the service of the petitioner is concerned from the date of
order and consequently direct the respondents herein to regularize the
service of the petitioner in time scale of pay after completion of 10 years
service from the date of their appointment made pursuant to and in
accordance with G.O.Ms.No.1644 RDLA Department dated 12.10.1979 as
well as G.O.Ms.No.258 MA & WS Department dated 15.03.1988 with all
attendant benefits.
In all W.Ps :
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muthappan
For R1 : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai, Spl.GP
For R2 : Mr.S.Thangavel, Spl.GP
For R3 : Mr.R.Rajeswaran
COMMON ORDER
The relief sought for in these writ petitions is to call for the records
relating to the proceedings of the third respondent in
Na.Ka.No.2667/2005/C1 dated 27.02.2006, 27.02.2006, 27.02.2006,
27.02.2006, 27.02.2006, 31.05.2006 and 07.06.2006 respectively and quash
the same insofar as the regularisation of the services of the petitioners are
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117, 17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
concerned from the date of order and consequently, direct the respondents
to regularise the services of the petitioners in time scale of pay after
completion of 10 years of service from the date of their appointment in
accordance with G.O.Ms.No.1644 RDLA Department dated 12.10.1979 as
well G.O.Ms.No.258 MA & WS Department dated 15.03.1988 with all
attendant benefits.
2.Today, when the matters were taken up for consideration, the
learned counsel appearing on both sides jointly submitted that a similarly
placed person by name, T.Renganathan filed WP.No.23587 of 2013,
praying for the very same relief as sought in these writ petitions and this
Court, by order dated 18.02.2020, dismissed the said writ petition, in the
following lines:
“10. Here in this case, initially the petitioner was
appointed under daily wages on consolidated pay and
thereafter, his service was regularised on 23.02.2006, as per the
G.O.Ms.No.21 dated 23.02.2006. Further, the petitioner has not
made any representation to regularise his service, after
completion of 10 years of service as NMR. Now, after a lapse
of several years, the petitioner has come forward with this writ
petition, which is not maintainable. Therefore, there is no merits
in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed.”
As against the aforesaid order, the petitioner therein preferred an appeal in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117, 17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
W.A.No.913 of 2020, which was also dismissed by the Division Bench of
this Court on 09.10.2020, the relevant passage of which is extracted
hereunder:
"8.Having considered the submissions raised, we find that
there is no valid explanation for having represented the
matter as late as in the year 2013 and then arrived before
this Court by filing a writ petition after almost seven years
of the regularisation order.
9.The conclusion on this issue therefore by the learned
Single Judge does not suffer from any infirmity and
refusal to exercise discretion cannot be said to be
warranted.
10.However, the refusal to exercise the discretion by the
High Court may not prevent the appellant from seeking
any relief from the Government and therefore, it will be
open to the appellant to seeks such relief as may be
admissible by approaching the authorities on the
administrative side, as further judicial review in the matter
does not appear to be permissible.
11.The writ appeal is consigned to records. No costs."
Therefore, according to the learned counsel, the issue involved herein is
covered by the aforesaid decision of the Division Bench of this Court.
3.In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel on
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117, 17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
either side, this Court is inclined to dismiss these writ petitions, by
following the aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench of this Court.
4.Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed, leaving it open to
the petitioners to seek such relief as may be admissible by approaching the
authorities on the administrative side. No costs. Consequently, the
connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
22.02.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
mtl
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
M.A.& W.S.Department,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St.George, Chennai - 9.
2.The Commissioner of Municipal Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai - 5.
3.The Commissioner,
Ambur Municpality,
Ambur – 635802, Vellore District.
R.MAHADEVAN, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117, 17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
mtl
W.P.Nos.17114, 17115, 17116, 17117,
17118, 17119 & 17120 of 2013
22.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
