Madras High Court
D.Rajendran vs The Commissioner on 29 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1530 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 29.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1530 of 2018
1.D.Rajendran
2.C.Kumaresan
3.T.John Raj ... Appellants/Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Commissioner,
Municipal Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai.
2.The Regional Director,
Municipal Administration,
Tirunelveli,
Tirunelveli District.
3.The Commissioner,
Kulithurai Municipality,
Kulithurai,
Kanyakumari District – 629 163. ... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order
passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.17764 of 2013, dated 26.02.2018.
For Appellants : Mr.D.Srinivasaragavan
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/4
W.A.(MD)No.1530 of 2018
For Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr.R.Baskaran
Standing Counsel for Government
*****
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
Heard Mr.D.Srinivasaragavan, learned counsel for the appellants and
Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel for Government, appearing for
respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2.The appellants are the Writ Petitioners, who are aggrieved against
the dismissal of the Writ Petition, wherein they sought for regularization on
completion of three years of service.
3.Admittedly, the appellants were appointed on a consolidated pay
without following any recruitment process. However, the Government thought it
fit to grant reprieve to the appellants and regularized their service with effect
from 23.02.2006. After having obtained the regularization and enjoyed the
benefits of the Government Order, the appellants want regularization with effect
from 25.05.2003 i.e., on completion of three years of service. In this regard, the
appellants placed reliance on G.O.Ms.No.199, Municipal Administration and
Water Supply Department, dated 21.05.1998. It is not clear as to how the said
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1530 of 2018
Government Order is applicable to the appellants, who admittedly worked on
consolidated pay. The learned Single Bench is absolutely right in rejecting the
appellants' request. Therefore, the Court cannot direct regularization of the
appellants on completion of three years of service. However, if the respondents
want to grant additional relief to the appellants, we are not preventing them
from that happening.
4.In the light of the above, we dismiss the Writ Petition with liberty to
the appellants to approach the concerned authority by way of a representation
with regard to their claim of retrospective regularization. No costs.
Index :Yes/No [T.S.S., J.] [S.A.I., J.]
Internet :Yes/No 29.06.2021
sj
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,
Municipal Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1530 of 2018
T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
sj
2.The Regional Director,
Municipal Administration,
Tirunelveli,
Tirunelveli District.
W.A.(MD)No.1530 of 2018
29.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
