Madras High Court
K.Subramanian vs The Commissioner Of Revenue ... on 25 June, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 25.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
K.Subramanian ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration,
O/o.the Commissioner of Revenue Administration,
Ezhilagam,
Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
2.The District Collector,
O/o.The Collectorate,
Sivagangai District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records relating to the impugned order of the second respondent,
dated 26.05.2017 and quash the same as illegal and consequently
direct the second respondent to regularize the services of the
petitioner as Junior Assistant at the Taluk Office, Tiruchuli,
Virudhunagar District from 08.07.2003 to 20.10.2010 and to
consider his service for seniority from 08.07.2003 to 19.01.2010
and till date.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
For Petitioner : Mr.N.S.Ponnaiah
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj
Government Advocate
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition to quash the
impugned order of the second respondent, dated 26.05.2017 and
consequently direct the second respondent to regularize the
services of the petitioner as Junior Assistant at the Taluk Office,
Tiruchuli, Virudhunagar District, from 08.07.2003 to 20.10.2010
and to consider his service for seniority from 08.07.2003 to
19.01.2010 and till date.
2. According to the petitioner, he was appointed on
07.07.2003 as Temporary Junior Assistant by the District Collector.
Subsequently, he participated in the examination conducted by the
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission on 17.07.2008 and was
selected as Junior Assistant in the permanent post and he is
working till now. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he
was worked as Temporary Junior Assistant in the Taluk Office,
Thiruchuli for about 7 years, 3 months and 11 days, his service was
not regularised till date. The representation given by the petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
was rejected and hence, he has come out with the present writ
petition.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner's temporary service viz., about 7 years at
Thiruchuli Taluk Office, has to be converted or modified as
permanent service for his promotion purpose in future. The
petitioner is not claiming any mandatory benefits. The judgment of
this Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court relied on by the petitioner
before the District Collector was not considered before passing the
impugned order. The impugned order of the second respondent is
against law and against the principles of natural justice and relied
on the order of this Court, dated 12.06.2017, in W.P(MD)Nos.21316
and 2137 of 2015 [P.Karthikeyan vs. The Commissioner, Most
Backward and Denotified Communities Welfare Department and
another] and the order, dated 27.11.2019, made in W.P.No.27923 of
2019 [S.Rajesh Kanna and others vs. The Secretary, Department of
School Education and another].
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
4. The first respondent filed counter affidavit. Mr.P.Subbaraj,
learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents
submitted that during July 2003, there was an indefinite mass
strike announced by employees of various departments in the State
of Tamil Nadu. In order to meet the contingency and the difficult
situation, the Government of Tamilnadu passed G.O.Ms.No.85,
Personal and Administrative and Reforms Department, dated
03.07.2003, creating 500 supernumerary posts for each district
under Rule 11 of the Tamilnadu State Subordinate Service Rules. A
gross remuneration of Rs.4,000/- per month was fixed. In the
Government Order, it was made clear that such supernumerary
posts are created on account of contingency and it will not give
them any right and that they are not members of Tamilnadu
Subordinate service and regular service rules applicable to the
regular employees are not applicable to them.
5. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondents further submitted that the respondents also entered a
contract with those employees in the format Annexure II that their
appointment is only temporary and they can be terminated at any
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
time without notice and without assigning any reason. The
petitioner was appointed as temporary Junior Assistant by the
District Collector, Virudhunagar, in the order
Na.Ka.A1/25889/2003, dated 07.07.2003. Agreeing for the terms
of contract, petitioner has joined duty and working in such capacity
and was receiving Rs.4,000/- per month in the supernumerary post
so created. While so, the Government took a policy decision to
bring of such employees into the regular establishment and
conduct a special competitive examination through Tamil Nadu
Public Service Commission. The petitioner was successful in the
special competitive examination and was appointed as Junior
Assistant in the office of the Tahsildar, Manamadurai, by
proceedings of the second respondent, dated 12.01.2010 and now
he is working in the regular post. Earlier, the petitioner was
appointed temporarily in supernumerary post on contract basis. In
view of the same, the petitioner is not entitled for regularisation of
the period, he worked in the supernumerary post. The respondents
considered the request of the petitioner and rejected the same by
giving valid reason and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
6. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents
and perused the materials available on record.
7. From the rival submissions and the materials on record, it
is seen that due to indefinite mass strike during July 2003 by
employees of various departments, 500 supernumerary posts were
created in each Districts and the District Collector was permitted
to appoint the persons to the said posts. Subsequently, in order to
give benefit to the persons appointed in supernumerary posts, a
special competitive examination was conducted through Tamil
Nadu Public Service Commission and successful candidates were
appointed in regular posts. These admitted facts clearly show that
the petitioner was not appointed to the regular post in the year
2003. To meet out the contingency, supernumerary posts were
created and the petitioner was one among the appointees in a
supernumerary post. Inasmuch as the petitioner was appointed in
supernumerary post, the petitioner is not entitled to regularisation
of service rendered by him in supernumerary post.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
8. In view of the same, the orders relied on by the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does advance the case
of the petitioner and there is no error in the impugned order.
Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No 25.06.2021
am
Note :
In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the
order may be utilized for official purposes,
but, ensuring that the copy of the order that
is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate / litigant
concerned.
To
1.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration,
Ezhilagam,
Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
2.The District Collector,
Sivagangai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
V.M.VELUMANI, J.
am
W.P.(MD)No.14534 of 2020
25.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
