Madras High Court
P.Anandharaj vs The Registrar on 28 June, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 28.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
and
W.M.P(MD)Nos.8302 & 8303 of 2021
P.Anandharaj ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Registrar,
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University,
Abishekpatti,
Tirunelveli District. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records pertaining to the impugned order of the respondent, dated
11.06.2021 in Ref.MSU/R/Estt (Admn)/NMR/Reply/2021 and quash
the same as null and void and consequently direct the respondent
to regularize and absorb the petitioner to the post of Junior
Assistant from the date of his appointment in the respondent
University and consequently direct the respondent to provide all
the service benefits to the petitioner from the date of his
appointment by considering the representation, dated 02.03.2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Thomas Raja Durai
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
ORDER
The petitioner has filed the present writ petition to quash the
impugned order of the respondent, dated 11.06.2021 in
Ref.MSU/R/Estt (Admn)/NMR/Reply/2021 as null and void and
consequently direct the respondent to regularize and absorb the
petitioner to the post of Junior Assistant from the date of his
appointment in the respondent University and consequently direct
the respondent to provide all the service benefits to the petitioner
from the date of his appointment by considering the representation,
dated 02.03.2021.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner has possessed B.Com., and Bachelor of Library
and Information Science. He had completed Typewriting higher in
Tamil and English and Office automation course in Computer. He
registered his qualification with the District Employment Exchange
from 04.10.2004. On coming to know the recruitment in the
respondent University through the Tamil Daily 'Dinamalar', dated
06.07.2008, the petitioner applied for the post of Library Attendant.
The respondent after conducting an interview and verifying
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
certificates of the petitioner, placed him as skilled NMR on
10.09.2009 in the respondent University for daily wages. By order,
dated 07.01.2015, the petitioner was brought under consolidated
pay from 10.09.2014. The petitioner made several representations
to the respondent to regularize his service in the post of Junior
Assistant. While so, the respondent, vide Memo
No.MSU/R/Estt/Admn/NMR/18/2018, dated 28.08.2018,
disengaged the petitioner from the service stating that the
petitioner did not possess the statutory qualification as mandated
by the statutes of the University and the petitioner is a backdoor
appointee in the respondent University. The petitioner gave a
representation, dated 29.08.2018, requesting the University to
permit him to continue to work as temporary contractual employee
in the University. The respondent did not reinstate the petitioner.
While so, considering the experience of the petitioner, the
respondent engaged the petitioner from 15.02.2019 and again
disengaged the petitioner on 14.05.2019.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner was reinstated as skilled NMR in the respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
University again on 17.02.2021. The petitioner gave
representation, 02.03.2021 to regularize his service as Junior
Assistant. The said representation was not considered. Hence, the
petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P(MD)No.6487 of 2021. This
Court, by order, dated 23.03.2021, directed the respondent to
consider the representation of the petitioner, within a period of
three months from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. The
respondent, by the impugned order, dated 11.06.2021, rejected the
representation of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner has come
out with the present writ petition.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further
submitted that the petitioner had worked continuously for 9 years
in the respondent University. The reasons given by the respondent,
in the year 2018, for disengaging the petitioner, are contrary to his
educational qualification. The respondent passed the impugned
order mechanically without application of mind and rejected the
representation of the petitioner, as if appointment of the petitioner
was not done following the Constitutional Mandate. At present, the
respondent University called for appointment of 52 posts of Junior
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
Assistant on 31.07.2018, out of which, 8 posts are specified for SC
community. Till then, the posts of Junior Assistant were not filled
up by the respondent University. The impugned order of the
respondent is not maintainable and prayed for setting aside the
order of the respondent. The learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner relied on the Judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court, dated 29.04.2014 made in W.A(MD)Nos.351, 911 & 908 of
2012 [The Registrar, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University,
Abishekapatti, Tirunelveli vs. S.Thendral and 19 others]. The
relevant paragraph of the said judgment reads as under:
“19. The reliance placed by the learned Senior
Counsel for the University upon the decision of the
Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Uma
Devi, cannot be applied stricto sensu, to cases of
this nature. It is for the simple reason that Courts
will have to distinguish between the appointments
made through back door methods and appointments
made by following the rigorous process of selection.
The principles that would apply to back door
appointments cannot be simply transported to the
cases where a process of selection is strictly
followed. “
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and
perused the materials available on record.
6. From the materials on record, it is seen that the petitioner
was engaged as skilled NMR on 10.09.2009 and he was working as
Library Attendant. On 28.08.2018 he was disengaged on the
ground that the petitioner did not possess statutory qualification as
mandated by the statutes of the University as well as he is an
improper and backdoor appointee in the respondent University. On
being disengaged, the petitioner gave representation, dated
29.08.2018 to the respondent for permitting him to continue to
work as temporary contractual employee. He was not engaged.
The petitioner has not challenged the said order of disengagement.
Subsequently, the petitioner was engaged by the University from
15.02.2019 to 14.05.2019 on contract basis. Thereafter, he was not
engaged by the University. The petitioner also did not seek for any
continuous employment. Again, the petitioner was engaged from
17.02.2021. At this stage, the petitioner gave representation,
dated 02.03.2021 and filed writ petition in W.P(MD)No.6487 of
2021. In compliance of the order of this Court, dated 23.03.2021, in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
the said writ petition, the respondent passed impugned order
rejecting the request of the petitioner for regularization. According
to the respondent, the petitioner was engaged as skilled NMR on
temporary basis in National Service Scheme cell of the University
purely on contingent basis under the Scheme funds and not under
the University funds. According to the respondent, the engagement
of the petitioner is purely temporary and the very scheme is
contingent on the fund and Scheme period and would automatically
come to an end on the expiry of the Scheme. It is further seen that
the respondent has also made an advertisement to the post of
Junior Assistant. The petitioner was also participated in the
selection, but, he was not successful. The petitioner has not denied
the facts in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition that
now, he was engaged on temporary basis in National Service
Scheme cell of the University. He also not denied the facts that he
participated in the selection for appointment to the post of Junior
Assistant and he was not successful. From the relief sought for in
the writ petition, it is seen that the petitioner is seeking absorption
and regularisation for the post of Junior Assistant from the date of
appointment in the respondent University.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
7. From the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the
writ petition, it is seen that the petitioner was engaged only as
skilled NMR and subsequently, he was disengaged from the said
post. It is not the case of the petitioner in his affidavit that he
worked as Junior Assistant at any point of time. In any event, the
petitioner is engaged only as skilled NMR on temporary basis for a
particular scheme. According to the respondent, on completion of
period and the scheme, the petitioner will be disengaged.
8. For the above reason, the judgment relied on by the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner does not advance the
case of the petitioner and the petitioner is not entitled for the relief
sought for in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is
liable to be dismissed and the same is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
28.06.2021
Index:Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
am
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI,J.,
am
W.P.(MD)No.10656 of 2021
28.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
