Madras High Court
The Principal District Institute vs A.Gunaseelan on 27 November, 2025
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S. Ramesh
W.A.No.3573 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.11.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH
and
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL
W.A.No.3573 of 2025
and C.M.P.No.29468 of 2025
The Principal District Institute
of Educational Training
Kaliyampoondi
Kancheepuram District ... Appellant
Vs.
1.A.Gunaseelan
2.The Presiding Officer
Second Additional Labour Court
Chennai 600 104 ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to set
aside the order dated 21.07.2023 made in W.P.No.7261 of 2017 and allow
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
W.A.No.3573 of 2025
the Writ Appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Neelakandan
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by Mr.K.H.Ravikumar
Government Advocate
For Respondents : R2 - Labour Court
JUDGMENT
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
This Writ Appeal is preferred against the orders passed by the
learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.Nos.7260 and 7261 of 2017
dated 21.07.2023.
2.Incidentally, the order passed in W.P.No.7260 of 2017 dated
21.07.2023 was challenged before this Bench in W.A.No.3417 of 2025,
which came to be dismissed by us on 19.11.2025 under the following
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
order:
“This Writ Appeal has been filed to set aside the order
dated 21.07.2023 made in W.P.No.7260 of 2017.
2. When the first respondent herein had challenged her oral
termination, dated 20.10.2004, by the Appellant / Management
before the Labour Court in I.D.No.316 of 2006, the same came to
be allowed by directing the appellant herein to reinstate her along
with the back wages and other benefits.
3. Before the Labour Court, the only objection raised by the
Appellant / Management is that the first respondent was appointed
by the Students' Committee and that there was no employer -
employee relationship between the appellant and the first
respondent herein. However, the appellant had not adduced any
satisfactory evidence before the Labour Court to substantiate
their claim. On the other hand, the first respondent had marked
Ext.W1, I.D card and Ext.W2, salary slip, which were issued by
the Management. On the strength of these documentary evidences
and other materials, the Labour Court had established the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
employer - employee relationship between the appellant and the
first respondent and accordingly, had ordered for reinstatement
and back wages.
4. When the appellant had challenged the award before the
learned Single Judge, all these aspects with regard to the
evidences available before the Labour Court and the
consequential award for reinstatement, have been properly
appreciated and the Writ Petition came to be dismissed.
5. Even before us, the learned Government Advocate for the
appellant would raise the same ground that the first respondent
was appointed only by the Students' Committee and that, they
were not her employer.
6. When there were sufficient materials before the Labour
Court to substantiate the employer - employee relationship
between the appellant and the first respondent and that the
Management had failed to produce any evidence to disprove the
same, we are unable to countenance the arguments of the learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
Government Advocate for the appellant.
7. The first respondent appears to have been terminated
way back on 20.10.2004, and though 21 years have passed, she is
yet to receive the benefits of the award. In this background, it
would be appropriate to direct the Appellant / Management to
forthwith pay the monetary benefits to the first respondent herein
within the stipulated time.
8. In the light of the above findings, the Writ Appeal stands
dismissed. The Appellant / Management is called upon to
forthwith comply with the award passed in I.D.No.316 of 2006
dated 05.08.2016 on or before 07.12.2025.
9. Post the matter on 08.12.2025 under the caption 'for recording
compliance'. “
3.The first respondent in this Writ Appeal is the second petitioner
before the Labour Court in I.D.No.317 of 2006. Since the common
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
award passed by the Labour Court in I.D.Nos.316 and 3i7 of 2006 has
already been challenged and the Writ Appeal filed in W.A.No.3417 of
2025 has been rejected by this Bench on 19.11.2025, we find no reason to
interfere with the present grounds raised in this Writ Appeal also.
4.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. Consequently,
the appellant / Management is called upon to forthwith comply with the
award passed in I.D.No.317 of 2006 dated 05.08.2016 on or before
07.12.2025. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
5.Post the matter on 08.12.2025 under the caption “for recording
compliance”.
[M.S.R, J.] [R.S.V, J.]
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
27.11.2025
kas
Index: Yes / No
Neutral Citation
Speaking / Non Speaking
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
R.SAKTHIVEL, J.
kas
To.
The Presiding Officer
Second Additional Labour Court
Chennai 600 104
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
27.11.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 01/12/2025 04:15:52 pm )
