Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 4730 (MAD)

D. Kasinathan v. State of Tamil Nadu

2010-10-27

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

body2010
Judgment :- 1. The petitioners joined the third respondent-Municipality as Nominal Muster-Roll employees on 19.12.1996. They worked as NMR workers in Water Supply and also for maintenance work, such as repairing of water pipes, hand pumps, and also for maintenance of street lights. 2. While so, the Government issued G.O.198, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 26.10.1998 regularising the services of the workmen employed in water supply works. Like wise, Government Orders were issued regularising the services of workers employed in sanitation, street light maintenance and driving. As far as G.O.198 is concerned that exclusively deals with the regularisation of the N.M.R. workmen employed in water supply work. As per the G.O.198, the workmen who joined prior to 31.12.1996 in the Municipalities have to be regularised. 3. However, the petitioners were not given the benefit of G.O.198 and on the other hand, they were terminated from services by an order dated 05.10.1999, without notice, on the sole ground that the petitioners joined duty as N.M.R., after 01.10.1996 and therefore they were terminated from services. Thereafter, the said order was cancelled by the letter dated 08.10.1999. However the benefit of G.O.198 was not given to them. They were continued in services. 4. The petitioners have filed the Original Applications in O.A.Nos.2800 of 2000 and 3225 of 2000 to 3230 of 2000 (W.P.Nos.40923 to 40929 of 2006), praying for a direction to the respondents to confer the benefits of G.O.198, Municipality Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 26.10.1998 and to regularise their services. 5. The respondents filed reply affidavit refuting the allegations. 6. According to the respondents, as per G.O.Ms.No.125, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 27.05.1999, regularisation could not be given under G.O.125 for N.M.R. employees who joined after 01.10.1996. Since the petitioners joined duty after 01.10.1996, they are not entitled to the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.125. 7. Heard Mr.G.Sriram, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mrs.Lita Srinivasan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.Devadoss, learned counsel for the third respondent-Municipality. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of G.O.198, as they were employed in the works of water supply of Municipality. G.O.Ms.No.125 is not applicable to them, as it relates to N.M.R employees worked in jobs other than sanitation, street light maintenance, water supply and driving. The learned counsel has taken me through G.O.125 in this regard. G.O.Ms.No.125 is not applicable to them, as it relates to N.M.R employees worked in jobs other than sanitation, street light maintenance, water supply and driving. The learned counsel has taken me through G.O.125 in this regard. 9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the third respondent-Municipality submits that the petitioners are not entitled to the benefit of regularisation as they joined duty after 01.10.1996. According to him N.M.Rs, who joined prior 01.10.1996 alone, are entitled to regularisation, as per G.O.Ms.No.125, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 27.05.1999. 10. I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record. 11. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, G.O.125 relates to N.M.R workers, other than the workers employed in sanitation, street light maintenance, water supply work and driving works. 12. On the other hand G.O.198 specifically applies to the N.M.R workers who were employed in water supply Department. As per G.O.198, the benefit of regularisation is conferred to N.M.R workers who joined prior to 31.12.1996. Thus the petitioners are entitled to regularisation as per G.O.198. 13. I have perused G.O.125. Paras 2 and 3 of the said G.O., are relevant for the purpose of the cases on hand and the same are extracted here-under: VERNACULAR (TAMIL) PORTION DELETED The aforesaid paras make it very clear that G.O.125 does not apply to the N.M.R workers employed in water supply works. Therefore, I reject the contentions of the learned counsel for the third respondent-Municipality. Hence, the petitioners are entitled to succeed accordingly. 14. Therefore, the respondents are directed to grant the benefit of G.O.198, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 26.10.1998, by regularising the services of the petitioners, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 15. With the above direction, the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.