Judgment :- 1. The prayer in the writ petition is to quash the proceedings of the third respondent dated 28.07.2006 restricting the date of bringing the petitioners into time scale with effect from 23.06.2006 onwards alone and to issue consequential direction to the respondents to bring them into the regular time scale from the date on which they completed three years consolidated pay services in the light of G.O.M.S.No.198 and 199 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 26.10.1998 and 12.08.1997 and the G.O.M.S.No.84 Municipal Administration and Water supply Department dated 21.05.1998 and the Judgment of Division Bench dated 23.06.2010 passed in W.A.Nos.47 and 385 of 2010 with all consequential service and monetary benefits. 2. According to the petitioners, they were working as consolidated pay Sweepers / Water Tank Maintainer in the third respondent Town Panchayat. They were appointed on 19.8.1998 and 1.9.2001 respectively and they completed three years of satisfactory service on 18.8.2001 and 31.8.2004 respectively. As per the various Government Orders issued by the Government, their services have to be regularised with effect from 19.8.2001 and 1.9.2004 respectively on completion of three years of service, but they were brought under regular time scale of pay by the third respondent only from 23.06.2006. The petitioners submitted their representation on 4.3.2009, 23.11.2010 and 12.9.2011 requesting the respondents to pass orders bringing them into regular time scale of pay from 19.8.2001 and 1.9.2004 respectively, instead of 23.06.2006, but no order is passed. Therefore, petitioners have come forward with this writ petition challenging the order of regularisation of his service in so far as it restricts the date of bringing them into to time scale of pay from 23.06.2006 instead of 19.8.2001 and 1.9.2004 respectively. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners humbly submits that identical relief was considered by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 47 of 2010 and the Division Bench, by judgment dated 23.06.2010, dismissed the appeal filed by the municipality and directed to regularise the service of the respondents/employees therein on completion of three years of service. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays this Court to allow this writ petition and to direct the respondents to pass orders regularising the service of the petitioners with effect from 19.8.2001 and 1.9.2004 respectively within a stipulated time limit. 4. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioners prays this Court to allow this writ petition and to direct the respondents to pass orders regularising the service of the petitioners with effect from 19.8.2001 and 1.9.2004 respectively within a stipulated time limit. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent are not in a position to dispute the fact that the issue involved in this writ petition is covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court passed in W.A. Nos. 47 and 385 of 2010 dated 23.06.2010. 5. In the judgment dated 23.06.2010 in W.A. Nos. 47 and 385 of 2010, the Division Bench of this Court held as follows:- "3. The learned single Judge, on the basis of the Judgment rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 1454 of 2007 dated 19.12.2008 in the case of Director of Town Panchayat, Kuralagam, Chennai and two others -vs- R. Sundaradas, allowed the writ petitions and held that the writ petitions are entitled to the time scale of pay only from the date when they completed three years on consolidated pay and not from any subsequent date. Aggrieved by the same, the respective Panchayats have filed the above appeals. 4. We have perused the judgment dated 19.12.2008 rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the aforementioned appeal. In our view, as rightly held by the learned single Judge, the present cases are squarely covered by the said Division Bench Judgment. We do not find any reason to differ with the view taken by the learned single Judge. There being no merit in the appeals, they stand dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are also dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs." 6. The SLP filed against the above said order in S.L.P.(Civil) No.26605 of 2010 was dismissed on 27.9.2010 and the order of the learned single Judge was also implemented by the Government by issuing G.O.Ms.No.570, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 15.11.2010. The petitioners herein are also similarly placed and there is no dispute regarding the said aspect. 7. In the light of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court mentioned supra, this writ petition is allowed. The petitioners herein are also similarly placed and there is no dispute regarding the said aspect. 7. In the light of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court mentioned supra, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders expeditiously regularising the service of the petitioners from the date on which they completed three years of service on consolidated pay. No costs.