Madras High Court
Pallavapuram Municipality vs The Presiding Officer on 14 June, 2023
W.P.Nos.31576 to 31584 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.06.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN
Writ Petition Nos.31576, 31577, 31578, 31579, 31580
31581, 31582, 31583 and 31584 of 2014
and M.P.Nos.2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2 and 2 of 2014
Pallavapuram Municipality
Rep.by its Commissioner
Chromepet, Chennai-44. …. Petitioner in all W.Ps.
-Vs-
1. The Presiding Officer
II Additional Labour Court
Chennai …. R1 in all W.Ps.
2. K.Subramani .... R2 in W.P.31576/2013
T.M.Nalini .... R2 in W.P.31577/2013
J.Sugunammal .... R2 in W.P.31578/2013
A.Balasubramanian .... R2 in W.P.31579/2013
M.Balaraman .... R2 in W.P.31580/2013
Samathanam .... R2 in W.P.31581/2013
S.Ramu .... R2 in W.P.31582/2013
V.Sekaran .... R2 in W.P.31583/2013
V.Kottiah .... R2 in W.P.31584/2013
Common Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the award of the 1 st
respondent in C.P.Nos.184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191 and 192 of 2007
dated 31.07.2013 and quash the same.
1/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.31576 to 31584 of 2014
In all W.Ps.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Srinivas
For Respondents : Mr.K.M.Ramesh, Senior Counsel
for M/s.S.Aparna – for R2 in all W.Ps.
R1 - Court
COMMON ORDER
The petitioner challenges the order of the Labour Court in C.P.Nos. 184,
185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192 of 2007 dated 31.07.2012.
2. It is the case of the workmen that they are entitled to regular time
scale of pay from the date on which they completed three years of service on
consolidated pay. The writ petitioner had granted them the benefit from
28.02.2006 and not from 01.01.2002. The entire dispute is within the period of
four years. The labour Court had held that the workmen have a right for
claiming the difference in pay in view of the fact of G.O.Ms.No.71 dated
05.05.1998 and that the ban imposed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.212
(P&IR) dated 01.01.2002 does not affect the payment of difference in pay scale.
3. The subject matter of this writ petition was also the subject matter in a
Full Bench judgment of this Court in Secretary to the Government,
2/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.31576 to 31584 of 2014
Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department -vs-
V.Marisamy reported in 2017(3) CTC 673. The Full Bench was pleased to
hold as follows:
“29.(a) Persons employed as Sanitary Workers and covered by
G.O.Ms.No.101, dated 30.04.1997 and G.O.Ms.No.71, dated
05.05.1998 are entitled to be regularized after the completion of the
respective period under Consolidated Pay as specified in the
Government Orders from the date of their initial appointment.”
4. Therefore, following the Full Bench judgment of this Court, all these
writ petitions have to be dismissed. However, Mr.P.Srinivas would bring to my
notice that the said order of the Full Bench has been kept in abeyance by
proceedings in S.L.P.(C) No.21935 of 2017 and S.L.P.No.19874 of 2017.
Therefore, there is no point in keeping these writ petitions pending. In the light
of the above judgment, these writ petitions stand dismissed. However, the
computation of the payment for each of the workman will be done based on the
verdict of the Supreme Court after the disposal of the aforesaid S.L.Ps.
5. With the above observation, these writ petitions are dismissed. No
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed.
14.06.2023
Index : Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
KST
3/4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.Nos.31576 to 31584 of 2014
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
KST
To
The Presiding Officer
II Additional Labour Court
Chennai.
W.P.Nos. 31576 to 31584
of 2014
14.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
