Madras High Court
J.Rajendran vs The District Collector on 10 October, 2023
W.P No.12666 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.10.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P No.12666 of 2020 and
W.M.P.No.15647 of 2020 and
W.M.P.Nos.20254 & 20256 of 2021
J.Rajendran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Villupuram District.
2.The Executive Officer,
Marakkanam Town Panchayat,
Villupuram District.
... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to regularise the
services of the petitioner as Sanitary Worker under the 2nd respondent
Town Panchayat with all attendant benefits and allowances by appointing
him on regular scale of pay with all attendant benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Saravanan
For Respondents : Mr.G.Nanmaran, Spl.Govt.Pleader
Page No.1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P No.12666 of 2020
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of Writ of
Mandamus to direct the respondents to regularise the services of the
petitioner as Sanitary Worker under the 2nd respondent Town Panchayat
with all attendant benefits and allowances by appointing him on regular
scale of pay with all attendant benefits.
2. Heard Mr.K.S.Saravanan, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.G.Nanmaran, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents.
3. The facts of case in brief are as follows:
The petitioner joined as NMR worker in the year 2007 for Sanitary
Works under the second respondent Town Panchayat. His appointment
was initially on a consolidated basis and he worked continuously in the
second respondent Town Panchayat from then onwards. The petitioner
requested for regular appointment when future vacancies arose. The
second respondent had overlooked the petitioner's claim and selected an
another individual by name V.Prabhu. Despite the said V.Prabhu worked
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P No.12666 of 2020
as Electrician, he was regularised in the post of Sanitary Worker. The
petitioner has challenged the same by way of filing a Writ Petition in
W.P.No.27639 of 2016 and the same is pending. The petitioner had given
several representations for regularising his appointment, that was not
considered and aggrieved over that, he has preferred this Writ Petition.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner's juniors were considered for regularisation and for the reasons
best known to the respondents, the petitioner was not considered for
regularisation.
5. The respondents filed a counter by alleging that the petitioner is
not eligible to be considered for any appointment because he is not an
employee of the second respondent. Hence the very claim of the
petitioner itself is baseless. The Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
and the High Court clearly settled the legal position that no benefit can
be given to all those persons who entered through back door without
undergoing the established procedure of recruitment by competing with
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P No.12666 of 2020
equally qualified and eligible persons.
6. Even according to the petitioner, he worked as a member of Self
Help Group. According to the second respondent, the Self Help Group
was outsourced for carrying out the maintenance of street lamp posts,
supply of drinking water and also for sanitation purposes. The said works
have been carried out under Solid Waste Management Rules 2016. If the
petitioner claims that he is a member of Self Help Group who had been
engaged by the second respondent to carry out the above said necessary
functions, he cannot say that he is directly employed by the second
respondent and he is entitled to get regularisation. This is obviously
because there is no employer and employee relationship between the
petitioner and the second respondent.
7. However, the petitioner has stated that the person similarly
placed has been considered by the second respondent for permanent post.
No documents have been furnished on either side to show how the other
person has been appointed or whether the other person had been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P No.12666 of 2020
regularised despite he was also working under Self Help Group. It is
learnt that the petitioner also challenged the employment of the similarly
placed person in some other Writ Petition. In such context of facts, the
petitioner cannot claim as a matter of right that his services should be
regularised even without proving his entitlement / eligibility. Since the
petitioner has stated that he has given representations, it is upto the
second respondent to consider the same and dispose it by passing
necessary orders in accordance with law. If no such representation is
available with the second respondent, the petitioner is at liberty to submit
a fresh representation and the second respondent shall consider the same
and pass orders in accordance with law.
8. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is disposed and
the second respondent is directed to consider the representation
submitted by the petitioner and dispose it by passing necessary orders
within four weeks. If no such representation is available with the second
respondent, the petitioner is at liberty to submit a fresh representation
within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P No.12666 of 2020
order and the second respondent shall consider the same and pass orders
in accordance with law within a period of four weeks thereafter.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
10.10.2023
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes/No
gsk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P No.12666 of 2020
To
1.The District Collector,
Villupuram District.
2.The Executive Officer,
Marakkanam Town Panchayat,
Villupuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P No.12666 of 2020
R.N.MANJULA, J.
gsk
W.P No.12666 of 2020 and
W.M.P.No.15647 of 2020 and
W.M.P.Nos.20254 & 20256 of 2021
10.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
