Madras High Court
V.Pandian vs Government Of Tamil Nadu on 5 March, 2021
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
IN The HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.03.2021
CORAM:
The HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
V.Pandian ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.Government of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Education Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director of Collegiate Education,
College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
3.The Principal,
Alagappa Government Arts College,
Karaikudi-630 003. ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to dispose of the
representation made by the petitioner dated 13.06.2018 to regularise the service of the
petitioner from the initial date of appointment dated 22.03.1995 with all consequential
service and monetary benefits within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Ms.A.Anusuya
For Respondents : Mr.S.Karthikeibalan,
Government Advocate for R1 and R2
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/6
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
ORDER
This Writ petition is filed, seeking a direction to the second respondent to dispose
of the representation made by the petitioner dated 13.06.2018 to regularise his service
from the initial date of appointment dated 22.03.1995 with all consequential service and
monetary benefits within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.
2.Mr.S.Karthikeibalan, learned Government Advocate takes notice for
respondents 1 and 2. By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the
admission stage.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Sweeper on daily wages
in the office of Pulankuruchi Va.Sa.Siva Government, Arts College by proceedings dated
22.03.1995,. Thereafter, since there was no vacancy in the said college, he was
transferred to the third respondent college, but his service was regularised only from
05.11.2007 pursuant to the G.O.Ms.No.365, dated 05.11.2007 and not from his initial
date of appointment i.e. on 22.03.1995. But his juniors got the benefit of regularization
from the date of appointment pursuant to the Judgments of this Court made in
W.P.No.7884 of 2013 dated 19.09.2014 and W.P.No.22587 of 2015, dated 02.09.2016.
In this regard, the petitioner made a representation dated 13.06.2018 to the second
respondent. As there was no response from him, the petitioner is before this Court by
filing the present Writ Petition, seeking the aforesaid relief.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
fact that the petitioner's representation is already pending with the second respondent,
the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:
i) A direction is issued to the second respondent herein to consider the
representation preferred by the petitioner dated 13.06.2018, if not already disposed of,
and pass appropriate orders thereon, in accordance with law, after affording an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other persons, if any, who are likely to be
affected, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 60 days from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order;
ii) In case the petitioner is unable to appear for personal hearing, the petitioner is
entitled to send a written submission within a period of one month from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order through registered post or speed post and the same shall
be treated as personal hearing. It is made clear that the petitioner can avail the
opportunity of either personal hearing or filing written submission and not both;
iii) In case the petitioner fails to appear or file a written submission in time, the
second respondent shall pass orders based on the available records and the petitioner,
cannot at a later point of time take a stand that opportunity of being heard is not given to
the petitioner;
iv) The petitioner shall furnish Mobile Number, email ID, if any, etc., along with a
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
copy of the representation dated 13.06.2018 and this order, to the second respondent
forthwith;
v) The second respondent is directed to communicate the decision taken on the
representation to the petitioner within a period of three weeks from the date of decision
taken thereon, by way of SMS/Email/registered post/speed post, so that there is no need
for the petitioner to file contempt after expiry of the specified period. In case the
authorities concerned fail to send communication to the petitioner, they will have to face
the civil imprisonment in case of contempt proceedings. If they are unable to serve the
order and the cover being returned un-served for one reason or the other, the same shall
be kept in the file without opening it for the proof of delivery, so that the petitioner, later
on, will not take a plea that the petitioner is not aware of the order. No costs.
05.03.2021
Index: Yes / No
Speaking order /Non speaking order
vum
To
1.Government of Tamil Nadu,
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
rep. By its Secretary to Government,
Education Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director of Collegiate Education,
College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.,
vum
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
W.P.No.5232 of 2021
05.03.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
