Madras High Court
The Commissioner vs S.Karunakaran on 12 August, 2024
Author: C.V. Karthikeyan
Bench: C.V. Karthikeyan, J.Sathya Narayana Prasad
W.A(MD) No.939 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 12.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
W.A(MD) No.939 of 2018
and
C.M.P(MD) No.6202 of 2018
1.The Commissioner,
Office of the Welfare of the Differently abled,
Chennai – 78.
2.The District Collector,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
3.The District Welfare Officer of the differently abled,
Office of the District Welfare Officer of the differently abled,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. ... Appellants/Respondents
-vs-
S.Karunakaran ... Respondent/writ petitioner
Prayer: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside
the order passed in W.P. (MD) No.2834 of 2018 dated 21.02.2018 and
allow the present Writ Appeal.
For Appellants : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar
Government Advocate
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Page 1 of 8
W.A(MD) No.939 of 2018
For Respondent : Mr.PR.Boomee Rajan
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.)
The writ appeal had been filed by the respondents in W.P. (MD)
No.2834 of 2018 questioning and challenging the order of the learned
Single Judge dated 21.02.2018, allowing the said writ petition.
2. The petitioner had been appointed as a Driver on temporary
basis in the Office of the District Welfare Officer of Differently Abled,
Office of the Welfare of Differently Abled, Sivagangai, by an order dated
26.05.2015. By the said order, the petitioner was not required to work
every day. Along with him, there were also several other drivers who had
been similarly employed temporarily. It must be kept in mind that they
were working in the Office of the Differently Abled to drive the Mobile
Vans for transporting the differently abled people.
3. Naturally, the petitioner should have taken the said employment
very seriously taking into consideration the passengers who had been
entrusted to him with responsibility to transport. Unfortunately, the
petitioner had been absent on several occasions intermittently and there
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
was also an earlier occasion when an order of termination had been
passed. Thereafter, out of grace once again he had been reinstated. Then,
several complaints had been received against the petitioner and
necessarily, the respondents had to take those complaints into
consideration.
4. Quite apart from this, the petitioner also invited registration of
FIR in Crime No.933 of 2012 under Sections 41(2) read with 109 Cr.P.C
by the Sivagangai Town Police Station and also another FIR in Crime
No.738 of 2012 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 294(b), 324 and 307 IPC
again on the file of the Sivagangai Town Police Station.
5. The learned Single Judge in the writ petition was of the opinion
that though the petitioner was appointed only on a temporary basis, he
could not have been summarily terminated from service. It had been
observed in the order that the petitioner had been permanently relieved
and therefore, he should have issued with a show-cause notice and only
after complying with the principles of natural justice, any action could
have taken against the petitioner. Unfortunately, the said order had been
passed at the time of admission itself.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that if they had a
chance to file a counter, they would have brought to the notice of the
Court the previous leaves taken by the petitioner, the complaints issued
against the petitioner by the Office of the Differently Abled and the
differently abled individuals and also the fact that there were two
criminal cases registered against the respondent herein. It had been
contended on behalf of the appellants that the writ petitioner was given a
long rope and was reinstated on one occasion. As a matter of fact, the
records also reveal that he had himself voluntarily sought for termination
on the ground of his physical illness and on the condition of his family.
7. The issue of grant of show-cause notice would not arise since it
was only a temporary employment. On the same day as the petitioner, one
of his co-employees S.Satheesh Kumar, who had also been appointed
was also discharged from service. He had filed writ petition in W.P. (MD)
No.l4686 of 2018, which was also similarly allowed by order dated
06.03.2018. The respondent therein had also filed writ appeal in W.A.
(MD) No.678 of 2018. A Division Bench of this Court had observed and
held as follows:-
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
“3. The learned Additional Government
Pleader submitted that all that the petitioner
sought was his reinstatement even while he
admitted that he was only temporarily
appointed and this prayer of the respondent
was rejected. However, the learned Single
Judge appeared to have equated the situation
as one involving summary termination of the
respondent. There is an error apparently on the
face of the record since the line of reasonings
of the learned Judge does not match the issue
before him.
4. Turning to the merits of the case, a
temporary employee does not have any vested
right to seek his appointment. Necessarily he
cannot be granted any remedy. The writ appeal
is accordingly allowed. No costs. Consequently
connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.”
The ratio observed therein applies on all squares to the writ
petitioner/respondent herein.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. We are not inclined to grant any relief as granted by the learned
Single Judge to the writ petitioner. The appeal deserves to be allowed and
the same is allowed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition
is closed. No costs.
[C.V.K., J.] [J.S.N.P., J.]
12.08.2024
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral citation:Yes/No
PKN
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Commissioner,
Office of the Welfare of the Differently abled,
Chennai – 78.
2.The District Collector,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
3.The District Welfare Officer of the differently abled,
Office of the District Welfare Officer of the differently abled,
Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.
and
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD, J.
PKN
12.08.2024
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
