Madras High Court
R.Thulasiraman vs The Secretary To Government on 22 June, 2021
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 22.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
and W.P.No.1 of 2015
R.Thulasiraman ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Secretary to Government,
Agriculture Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort. St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director of Agriculture,
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
3. The Joint Director of Agriculture,
Nagapattinam - 611 001. ... Respondents
PRAYER: The Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to
call for the records of the proceedings of the first respondent made in Letter
No.28541/nt/ep//4(1)/2014-4, dated 27.04.2015 and quash the same
consequently, direct the first and second respondents to treat the earlier
services rendered by the petitioner from 27.08.1981 to 04.08.1984 as Junior
Assistant in the respondent department and the break period from
1 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
05.08.1984 to 22.05.1992 for the purpose of promotion, all other service
and attendant benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.V.Bharathi
For Respondents : Mr.C.Selvaraj
Government Advocate (Civil)
-----
ORDER
The present Writ Petition been filed for the issuance of a Writ
of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the proceedings of the
first respondent made in Letter No.28541/ nt/ep//4(1)/2014-4, dated
27.04.2015 and quash the same consequently, direct the first and second
respondents to treat the earlier services rendered by the petitioner from
27.08.1981 to 04.08.1984 as Junior Assistant in the respondent department
and the break period from 05.08.1984 to 22.05.1992 for the purpose of
promotion, all other service and attendant benefits.
2. The petitioner was appointed on compassionate basis on the
demise of his father, who was working as a Foreman in the respondent
2 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
Department. He was appointed on 27.08.1981 as Junior Assistant. The
Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.998, Labour and Employment
Department, dated 02.05.1981, wherein, it is specified that if there is already
any earning member in the family of the Government Servant, who dies in
harness, the other dependents of the deceased Government Servant will not
be eligible for the concession of appointment in Government Departments.
In view of the G.O., the employment granted to the petitioner was cancelled
on 04.08.1984. Thereafter, the Government, in G.O.Ms.No.1044, Labour
and Employment Department, dated 23.11.1990, has amended the earlier
G.O.Ms.No.998, Labour and Employment Department, dated 02.05.1981,
and incorporated a proviso to paragraph No.3 of the said G.O. The proviso
reads as under:-
"3(i) provided, that if any of the dependent dependents of
deceased Government Servants is/are employed in Military
service, any one of the other dependents is eligible for
appointment in Government Department and Government
Undertakings under Compassionate Grounds".
3 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
3. In the light of the G.O., the petitioner's service was restored
with effect from 22.05.1992. However, his appointment was treated as fresh
appointment and the continuity of service was not given. Therefore, he
made a representation to the Department and since the same has not been
considered, he approached this Court by way of W.P.No. 25994 of 2014,
wherein, this Court, by its order dated 24.09.2014, directed the respondents
to consider the representation of the petitioner on merits and pass orders.
Accordingly, the respondents have considered the representation and passed
the impugned order holding that his service will be counted only from the
date of his re-appointment i.e. 22.05.1992 and it cannot be regularised with
effect from the date of his original appointment i.e. 27.08.1981. Aggrieved
over the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that
G.O.Ms.No.998, Labour and Employment Department, dated 02.05.1981,
was implemented only with effect from 05.05.1982, but, on the date of
appointment on compassionate ground with effect from 27.08.1981, the
G.O. was not in operation and therefore, the respondents ought not to have
4 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
cancelled the appointment. After amendment of the G.O., his service was
restored. Therefore, it has to be regularized with effect from the initial date
of appointment and not on the basis of restored date. Therefore, the order
passed by the respondent is arbitrary and illegal.
5. Mr.C.Selvaraj, learned Government Advocate (Civil Side)
would contend that the petitioner has got this re-employment pursuant to the
order passed by this Court in W.P.No.25994 of 2014, dated 24.09.2014. For
all purposes, he was appointed afresh and therefore, his service can be
regularized only with effect from 22.05.1992, otherwise, it will upset the
settled seniority in the cadre of Junior Assistant. On these grounds, he
would seek dismissal of the Writ Petition.
6. I considered the submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing on either side.
7. The admitted fact remains that the petitioner was appointed
as Junior Assistant on 27.08.1981 after his father, who was working as
5 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
Foreman in the Department died in harness. At the time of appointment, it is
not in dispute that the petitioner was fully eligible to hold the post of Junior
Assistant. He continued as such till 04.08.1984 and he was removed from
service. Once he has become the member of the service, he should not be
removed without following the procedure for the same. However, it is not
clear as to why the petitioner has not challenged his removal.
8. Be that as it may, now the crucial issue is that whether
regularization of his employment should be counted from the date of his
initial employment or not? It is noted that vide G.O.No.1044, dated
23.11.1990, the proviso has been incorporated to G.O.Ms.No.998, dated
02.05.1981. It is pertinent to note that G.O.Ms.No.998, which prescribed the
procedure for recruitment on compassionate ground is still in force, and it is
not superseded by any other G.O. Even G.O.Ms.No.1044, dated 23.11.1990,
amends the existing G.O. by incorporating a proviso to paragraph No.3 in
G.O.Ms.No.998 and the G.O. has been clarified by the Government. The
clarification takes effect from the date of issuance of the G.O. i.e.
02.05.1981. This amendment in other words, does not alter or change the
6 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
procedure, but, only clarifies paragraph No.3, which says that where one of
the family members is a earning member, other dependents are not entitled
to the compassionate ground appointment. The clarification exempts the
employment of the family members in the Defence Post and provides for
compassionate ground appointment to other dependent family members.
Had it been clarified as early as in the year 1984, the petitioner would not
have been removed from service.
9. Secondly, as rightly contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner, this G.O.Ms.No.998, dated 02.05.1981 came into force only from
1982. In that view of the matter, there can not be any impact of this G.O on
the petitioner's employment. Further, the petitioner has been restored to
service to which, he was appointed on compassionate ground basis. That
means, his appointment to the Post of Junior Assistant on compassionate
ground on 27.08.1981 is restored. Therefore, it shall be construed that the
petitioner would have continued in the service, but, for wrong
implementation of G.O.Ms.No.998, dated 02.05.1981. For all purposes, the
service should be counted from the date of initial appointment on
7 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
compassionate ground with effect from 27.08.1981. It is only a rectification
of the error and the petitioner was not removed from service for any
misconduct or on basis of other disqualification. Therefore, it is not the fault
of the petitioner for remaining out of service for six long years. He was
restored in service only after intervention of this Court. Therefore, it is clear
that the petitioner was always ready and willing to continue his
employment.
10. As per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Union of India Vs. K.V.Janakiraman, if a person is kept out of
employment for no fault of his, he will be entitled to monetary benefits on
reinstatement. However, admittedly, the petitioner has not challenged the
order of removal and therefore, I consider that the monetary benefits need
not be given to him. At the same time, his service should be counted from
the date of his initial appointment and he is entitled to all other attendant
benefits.
8 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
11. It is submitted before this Court that the petitioner is left
with only two years of service. Therefore, his services can be counted for
the purpose of pension and he can be considered for notional promotion on
par with his immediate juniors.
12. In effect, the order passed by the respondent refusing to
regularize the service with effect from the date of his initial appointment in
Letter No.28541/nt/ep//4(1)/2014-4, dated 27.04.2015, is set aside and the
respondents are directed to regularize the service of the petitioner with
effect from 27.08.1981 from the date of his initial appointment and provide
all other attendant benefits and continuity of service and notional
promotion.
In fine, the Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as
to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
22.06.2021
asi
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
9 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
M. GOVINDARAJ, J.
asi
To
1. The Secretary to Government,
Agriculture Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort. St.George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director of Agriculture,
Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
3. The Joint Director of Agriculture,
Nagapattinam - 611 001.
W.P.No.16821 of 2015
and W.P.No.1 of 2015
22.06.2021
10 of 10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
