Madras High Court

R. Soundararajan (Died) vs The Principal Secretary on 21 July, 2025

    2025:MHC:1718



                                                                                        W.P.(MD) No.20184 of 2016

                       BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                           Reserved On             : 16.07.2025

                                          Pronounced On : 21.07.2025

                                                          CORAM:

                            THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.D. MARIA CLETE

                                          W.P. (MD) No.20184 of 2016
                                                     and
                                         W.M.P. (MD) No.14474 of 2016

                     1.R. Soundararajan (Died)
                     S/o. A. Rengasamy,
                     Work Inspector, Grade - II (Retired)
                     Gundar Basin Sub Division,
                     Public Works Department,
                     Thirumangalam,
                     Madurai District.

                     2.Saroja,
                     W/o, R. Soundararajan,
                     No. 51, Therkku Theru,
                     Anupanadi,
                     Madurai 625 009.

                     3. Nagarajan,
                     S/o. R. Soundararajan,
                     No. 51, Therkku Theru,
                     Anupanadi,
                     Madurai 625 009.

                     (P2 & P3 are Substituted vide court order
                     dated.06.11.2024 in WMP(MD).20658/2024 in
                     WP(MD).20184/2016 by RPJ)                                           ... Petitioners




                     1/8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis               ( Uploaded on: 21/07/2025 06:27:20 pm )
                                                                                              W.P.(MD) No.20184 of 2016

                                              Vs.

                     1.The Principal Secretary,
                     Public Works Department,
                     Fort St. George,
                     Chennai – 9.

                     2.The Executive Engineer,
                     Water Resources Organization,
                     Public Works Department,
                     Gundar Basin Division,
                     Tallakulam,
                     Madurai – 2.                                                                   ... Respondents

                     PRAYER in W.P.:
                                  To issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly in the nature
                     of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the
                     impugned G.O.(Ms).No. 243, Public Works (C2) Department dated
                     11.12.2015 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same as illegal in
                     respect of the impugned portion of the said G.O., in paragraph No.12
                     mentioned as with the monetary benefits from the date of his retirement
                     i.e., on 29.02.2012 and consequently direct the respondents to pay
                     monetary benefits to the petitioner from the date of his regularization on
                     01.01.1985 and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem
                     fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus render justice.


                     PRAYER IN W.M.P.:
                                  To dispense with the production of the original copy of the
                     impugned G.O.(Ms.)No. 243, Public Works (C2) Department, dated
                     11.12.2015, passed by the 1st respondent pending disposal of this writ
                     petition and thus render justice.


                     2/8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis                     ( Uploaded on: 21/07/2025 06:27:20 pm )
                                                                                              W.P.(MD) No.20184 of 2016




                     APPEARANCE OF PARTIES:
                                  For Petitioners           : Mr. V. Thirumal

                                  For Respondents          : Mr.J.Ashok
                                                             Additional Government Pleader


                                                          JUDGMENT

Heard.

2. This writ petition is filed for the issuance of a Writ of

Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned portion of G.O.(Ms) No.

243, Public Works (C2) Department dated 11.12.2015, in so far as it

restricts the monetary benefits to the petitioner from 29.02.2012 (date of

retirement) instead providing from the date of regularization, and to

consequently direct the respondents to grant monetary benefits from

01.01.1985, the date of notional regularisation as Work Inspector

Grade-II.

3. The petitioner was initially appointed on 03.06.1974 as Nominal

Muster Roll (NMR) Mazdoor and was later regularised in the post of Head

Mazdoor with effect from 01.01.1985, by G.O.(Ms) No.193 dated

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/07/2025 06:27:20 pm )

25.01.1990. Claiming to have possessed the necessary educational

qualification and having discharged duties of Work Inspector Grade-II, the

petitioner filed W.P.(MD) No.7197 of 2008 seeking regularisation in the

said post with attendant and monetary benefits. That writ petition was

allowed on 27.01.2011. The Government, after some delay, issued G.O.

(Ms.) No.243 dated 11.12.2015, granting notional regularisation as Work

Inspector Grade-II with effect from 01.01.1985 but limiting monetary

benefits from 29.02.2012, the date of retirement.

4. The petitioner’s grievance is that such restriction of monetary

benefits is arbitrary and contrary to the judicial direction in W.P.(MD) No.

7197 of 2008. However, the said order merely directed regularization with

attendant and monetary benefits as per Rules. It did not direct back wages

or confer an absolute entitlement for retrospective financial benefits.

5. The respondents, in paragraph No.5 of their counter affidavit, has

stated as follows:

“5. Further, it is submitted that it would be pertinent to mention herein that as per Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Engineering Subordinate Services for the post of covered under Work-Charged Establishment issued in G.O.(Ms.)No.12, Public Works Department, dated

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/07/2025 06:27:20 pm )

20.01.2009 in which the qualification for the post of Work Inspector have been prescribed therein as follows:

I. Must possess I.T.I Certificate in Draftsman Civil Trade.

II. Must undergone apprenticeship Training for a period not less than One year in Government or any other Organization recognized by the Government.”

6. The petitioner seeks support from the case of one P. Koothan,

wherein the Government passed G.O.(Ms.) No.152 dated 03.07.2017

granting notional regularisation from 01.01.1986 as Work Inspector

Grade-II and extended monetary benefits only from the date of that G.O.

The challenge to that G.O. resulted in W.P.(MD) No.1833 of 2018, which

was allowed by a learned Single Judge. However, the Division Bench in

W.A.(MD) No.337 of 2019 reversed the Single Judge’s order and held as

follows:

“24. There is no justification in the petitioner seeking parity with the post of Work Inspector Grade II, as admittedly he did not hold the prescribed qualification for that posts. In any event, there is no necessity to go into that question as it is an admitted position that his appointment and regularisation, both, are only in the post of Head Mazdoor. The order, of appointment and regularisation, have attained finality.”

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 21/07/2025 06:27:20 pm )

7. In the present case too, the petitioner was originally appointed as

a Mazdoor, and his regularization as Head Mazdoor was not in dispute.

The subsequent direction for regularization as Work Inspector Grade-II,

based on long service and experience, did not involve any

contemporaneous relaxation of qualification norms under the applicable

Rules.

8. Applying the same reasoning, this Court finds no merit in the

petitioner’s claim for financial benefits from 01.01.1985. The G.O.(Ms)

No.243 dated 11.12.2015 is in consonance with judicial directions and

executive discretion.

9. In light of the decision of the Division Bench in W.A.(MD) No.

337 of 2019, this Court holds that the petitioner is not entitled to monetary