Madras High Court
State Of Tamil Nadu Represented By vs S.Aruldoss on 30 November, 2022
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 30.11.2022
Coram
The Honourable Mr. Justice P.N.PRAKASH
and
The Honourable Mr. Justice RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.20496 of 2022
1.State of Tamil Nadu represented by
its Secretary,
Public Works Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Chief Engineer (General) and
Engineer-in-Chief,
Water Resources Department,
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. .. Appellants
Vs
1.S.Aruldoss
S/o.Salamen
2.V.Manimegalai
W/o.Venkatesan
3.M.Mala
W/o.Muthukrishnan
4.S.Punitha
W/o.P.Srinivasan
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
5.Selvam
S/o.P.Srinivasan
6.S.Vellaichamy
S/o.Sonaiyatha
7.A.Janaki
W/o.P.Aruldoss
8.M.Latha
W/o.P.Nanthakumar
9.E.Elisabeth Rani
W/o.Eruthairaj
10.T.Sivaneswari
W/o.Tennarasu
11.S.Santhi
W/o.P.Sekar
12.D.Tamilselvi
W/o.P.Devaraj
13.S.Lakshmi
W/o.P.Selvaraj
14.S.Lakshmi
W/o.Selvam
15.E.Yasodha
W/o.Ekambaram
16.K.Manonmani
W/o.Kanniappan
Page 2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
17.R.Elumalai
S/o.Ramasamy
18.B.Renuka
W/o.Balaraman
19.R.Vasantha
W/o.Ravi
20.S.Malaiswamy
S/o.Sankaraiah
21.Ambika
22.A.Arumugam
S/o.Annamalai
23.Pushpavathi
W/o.Durairaj
24.Rajeswari
W/o.Subramani
25.Subramani
S/o.Palani .. Respondents
Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated
23.12.2020 passed in W.P.No.14346 of 2020 on the file of this Court and to
set aside the same.
For Appellants : Mr.M.Rajendran
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondents : Mr.L.Chandrakumar
Page 3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
JUDGMENT
( Delivered by P.N.PRAKASH, J.)
Challenging the order dated 23.12.2020 passed in W.P.No.14346 of
2020 on the file of this Court, the appellants/State have preferred the present
writ appeal.
2. Heard Mr.M.Rajendran, learned Additional Government
Pleader appearing for the appellants and Mr.L.Chandrakumar, learned
counsel appearing for the respondents.
3. In paragraph nos.9, 10 and 11 of the order dated 23.12.2020
passed in W.P.No.14346 of 2020, the learned Single Judge has given the
following reasons for quashing the G.O.(3D) No.40, Public Works (C2)
Department dated 25.09.2018:
“9. If the impugned Government Order is to
be upheld in so far as it restricts the financial
benefits payable to the petitioners, that would
amount to rewriting the judgment of the learned
Single Judge dated 04.07.2012 in W.P.No.16107 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
2012. The respondents having lost upto the Hon-ble
Apex Court, it cannot invidiously abridge the
benefits granted by the learned Single Judge as that
would amount to, in the opinion of this Court,
committing a contempt of the order of this Court.
10. The arguments advanced on behalf of the
respondents by the learned Special Government
Pleader, is legally unacceptable for the reason that
once the order of the learned Single Judge has been
upheld and the same has not been varied by the
Higher Court, the respondents have no choice except
to implement the order in its letter and spirit. It is
not open to the respondents to read something into
the judgment it is not open to the respondents to
conveniently interpret the order in their favour and
restrict the benefits payable to the petitioners. Such
action on the part of the respondents amounted to
tampering with the judgment of the learned Single
Judge and therefore, the impugned order is liable to
be struck down as invalid and illegal in so far as it
denies the monetary benefits from the date of
regularisation of the services of these petitioners.
11. In the above circumstances, this writ
petition is allowed and the impugned order in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
G.O.(3D) No.40, Public Works (C2) Department
dated 25.09.2018, is hereby set aside only in so far
as it restricting the monetary benefits only from the
date of issue of the order and the respondents are
consequentially directed to calculate and pay the
arrears of salary to the petitioners from the date of
regularisation in terms of the order passed by the
learned Single Judge of this Court dated 04.07.2012
in W.P.No.16107 of 2012, within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.”
4. We find no infirmity or illegality in the order of the learned
Single Judge warranting interference in this appeal.
Hence, this writ appeal stands dismissed. Connected C.M.P. is closed.
No costs.
(P.N.P., J.) (TKRJ)
30.11.2022
Index: Yes/No
nsd
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
P.N.PRAKASH, J.
and
RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
nsd
W.A.No.2593 of 2022
30.11.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
