A.H.Mani vs State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By
2022 Latest Caselaw 10003 Mad

                                                                       WP No.14303 of 2014

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED : 14-06-2022

                                                        CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                              WP No.14303 of 2014



                     1.A.H.Mani
                     2.T.M.Subramani
                     3.T.Ravi
                     4.J.Karnan
                     5.N.Nanjundan                 ..               Petitioners

                                                         vs.


                     1.State of Tamil Nadu represented by
                       Secretary,
                       Municipal Administration and Water Supply
                          Department,
                       Fort St. George,
                       Chennai – 600 009.

                     2.The Director of Municipal Administration,
                       Chepauk,
                       Chennai – 600 005.

                     3.The Commissioner,
                       Uthagamandalam Municipality,
                       Nilgiri District.         ..                 Respondents


                     1/8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                           WP No.14303 of 2014

                                  Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                     praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for
                     the records relating to G.O.(Ms.) No.21, Municipal Administration and
                     Water Supply (MC3) Department, dated 23.02.2006 passed by the first
                     respondent herein and quash the portion of the order i.e., 'to regularise their
                     services in the regular post, from the date of issue of this order' alone and
                     the consequential order in Na.Ka.No.E1/13666/2001 dated 15.05.2006
                     passed by the third respondent herein and further direct the respondents to
                     regularise the services of the petitioners from the date of joining with all
                     service and other monetary benefits.


                                  For Petitioners                  : Mr.K.M.Rameh

                                  For Respondents-1 and 2          : Mr.A.M.Ayyadurai,
                                                                     Government Advocate.

                                  For Respondent-3                 : Mr.P.Srinivas



                                                             ORDER

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to call for the

records relating to G.O.(Ms.) No.21, Municipal Administration and Water

Supply (MC3) Department, dated 23.02.2006 passed by the first respondent

herein and quash the portion of the order i.e., 'to regularise their services in

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.14303 of 2014

the regular post, from the date of issue of this order' alone and the

consequential order in Na.Ka.No.E1/13666/2001 dated 15.05.2006 passed

by the third respondent herein and further direct the respondents to

regularise the services of the petitioners from the date of joining with all

service and other monetary benefits.

2. The petitioners were employed as Wiremen, Meter Reader

and Junior Assistants respectively on daily wages basis (NMR) in the

Udhagamandalam Municipality. The initial appointment of the petitioners

were made on consolidated pay basis. They continued in service for several

years. Subsequently, the service of the writ petitioners were regularized

based on the G.O issued in G.O.Ms.No.21 of Municipal Administration and

Water Supply Department dated 23.02.2006.

3. The grievances of the writ petitioners are that though their

services were regularized pursuant to the G.O and Orders of the Court from

the date of their initial appointment and benefits are also settled, now, the

respondents has issued impugned order to recover the arrears already paid to

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.14303 of 2014

the employees.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners made a submission

that the benefits were granted pursuant to orders passed by this Court in

W.P.No.17025 of 2012 dated 30.07.2012. Thus, the recovery order

impugned without issuing show cause notice is liable to be set aside. It is

contended that the said order of this Court reached finality.

5. The learned counsel for the third respondent-Municipality

objected the said contention by stating that the issues regarding the

regularization of the service of these temporary employees from the date of

initial appointment as consolidated employees are now subjudice before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Initially the Hon'ble Full Bench of this

Court rejected the claim of these temporary employees. Subsequently, in a

Review Application filed by the employees, the Hon'ble Full Bench

reviewed its own judgment in Review Application (MD) No.87 of 2014 and

granted benefit of regularization from the date of initial appointment as

temporary employees.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.14303 of 2014

6. The learned counsel for the third respondent-Municipality

made a submission that the said Full Bench judgment was taken by way of

appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP Nos.21249 of

2017 and 22176 of 2017 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India granted

interim stay of the judgment of Hon'ble Full Bench passed in Review

Application on 15.09.2017. The stay granted is in force and the appeal is

sub-judice before the Hon'ble Apex Court of India. Therefore, the rights of

the employees are to be crystallized only after the disposal of the appeal by

the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.

7. In these circumstances, any order in the present writ petition

would cause prejudice to either of the parties. The rights of the employees to

be crystallized by the Hon'ble Apex Court of India in the pending appeal.

The respondents have issued the impugned order based on the fact that the

petitioners are not entitled for the arrears of pay as they are not liable for

retrospective regularization from the date of expiry of 3 years from the

consolidated pay service.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.14303 of 2014

8. In view of the fact that the issues are sub-judice before the

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the rights of the petitioners are to be

decided only after the disposal of the Special Leave Petition. Thus, it is

made clear that the decision to be taken by the Hon'ble Apex Court is to be

made applicable to the petitioners and also for the purpose of extending the

benefit of regularization and for grant of consequential benefits. Till the

time the appeal is disposed of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the

proposed recovery alone shall be kept in abeyance.

9. With the above observations, the writ petition stands

disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

14-06-2022

Index : Yes/No.

Internet : Yes/No.

Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order.

Svn

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.14303 of 2014

To

1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

2.The Director of Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

3.The Commissioner, Uthagamandalam Municipality, Nilgiri District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.14303 of 2014

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Svn

WP 14303 of 2014

14-06-2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis