Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 4145 (MAD)

M. Gunalan v. State of Tamil Nadu

2013-12-10

M.VENUGOPAL

body2013
Judgment 1. The Petitioner has focused the instant Writ of Mandamus praying for issuance of an order by this Court directing the Second Respondent to regularize the Petitioner's appointment as 'Full Time Night Watchman' with effect from 20.07.1994 with continuity of service and to confer all attendant benefits. 2. According to the Petitioner, he has studied up to 10th Standard (failed) and still he is working as Full Time Night Watchman in the Second Respondent/the District Educational Officer's Office, for the past 19 years. Originally, he was appointed as part time Sweeper on 01.04.1980, on a consolidated monthly wage of Rs.120/- in the office of the A.E.O., Konavattam. Further, on 20.07.1994, he was appointed as a Full Time Night Watchman as per the orders issued by the Second Respondent/District Educational Officer, Vellore, in Na.Ka.No.1351/A1/94 dated 20.07.1994 and his salary was fixed in the time scale of pay of Rs.750-12-870-15-945. Immediately, he joined duty as Full Time Night Watchman. After putting one year of service as 'Full Time Night Watchman', he should have been confirmed. However, the Respondents have not issued till date, necessary orders confirming his service. 3. The Petitioner has made number of representations to the Respondents and other Authorities on numerous dates including one, dated 01.08.2012, seeking to confirm his appointment as a Full Time Night Watchman. But, the said representation has not met with a positive response from the Respondents' side. 4. Aperusal of the counter filed by the Respondents, clearly pointed out that the regularisation of the Petitioner could not be done as there is no such regularisation granted to the Petitioner for considering him to the post of Full Time Night Watchman. Further, it is the stand of the respondents that the Competent Authority/Government is to pass necessary regularisation order and therefore, the Second Respondent could not effectively dispose of the pending representations of the Petitioner. 5. At this juncture, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner brings to the notice of this Court that the subject matter in issue in the present Writ Petition in W.P.No.31991 of 2012 on the file of this Court, is squarely covered by the order of this Court, dated 04.04.2013 in W.P.No.26037 of 2012 between C. KUPPURAO V. 1.THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, FORT ST. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, FORT ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI-600 009 AND 2 OTHERS, wherein, this Court in paragraphs 3 and 4, has observed and held as under: "3. The facts are not disputed, as seen from the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent himself. It is admitted that the Petitioner has been working in the third respondent school as Night Watchman, ever since 09.01.1995. The second respondent has even confirmed the appointment by the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1351A/94 dated 09.01.1995. It is admitted by the second respondent that the Petitioner is engaged on full time basis. The fact that the Petitioner has been in continuous service is also not disputed. Therefore, the Petitioner is entitled to the benefit of various Government Orders and the decisions of this Court, which have been confirmed up to the Supreme Court. 4. Therefore, following the Government Orders and the various decisions of this Court, this writ petition is allowed, directing the second respondent to pass orders of regularisation of the services of the Petitioner, with effect from the date of his appointment and grant all the consequential benefits. The second respondent shall pass orders within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1 of 2012 is closed." 6. More over, in another order of this Court, dated 29.08.2013 in W.P.No.26127 of 2012 between P.RANGANATHAN V. 1.THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, FORT. ST. GEORGE, CHENNAI-600 009 AND ANOTHER, this Court in paragraphs 2 to 6, has observed and held as follows: "2. The Petitioner was appointed as Full Time Night Watchman in the office of the second respondent on 09.01.1995, pursuant to the order passed by the second respondent. The Petitioner's pay was fixed in the scale of Rs.750-12-840-15-945 and he has been discharging his duties as a Full Time Night Watchman. In spite of several representations made by the Petitioner, no action has been taken by the second respondent to regularise his service and therefore, the Petitioner has filed this writ petition for the aforementioned relief. 3. The Petitioner's pay was fixed in the scale of Rs.750-12-840-15-945 and he has been discharging his duties as a Full Time Night Watchman. In spite of several representations made by the Petitioner, no action has been taken by the second respondent to regularise his service and therefore, the Petitioner has filed this writ petition for the aforementioned relief. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed by the second respondent agreeing and accepting the case of the Petitioner stating that the second respondent through his proceedings dated 20.07.1994, issued necessary orders confirming the Petitioner as a Full Time Night Watchman and he has continued as such. As regards the prayer for regularisation, it is stated that necessary relaxation order is required from the Government. 4. The learned counsel for the Petitioner brought to the notice of this Court, an order passed in W.P.No.26037 of 2012, dated 04.04.2013, in which a direction was issued to the authorities for regularisation of the services of a Night Watchman, who was working in a Government Higher Secondary School by order dated 09.01.1995. 5. It is not in dispute that the Petitioner was appointed as a Full Time Night Watchman in a time scale and has been discharging his duties from 1995 onwards. The continuous functioning of the Petitioner makes it clear that he is need for the post. If the Petitioner has been put in a time of scale, it goes without saying that the post is available in which, the Petitioner has been accommodated. At best, there may be a requirement for getting age relaxation or relaxation of educational qualification, which has to be done by the second respondent by submitting appropriate proposal to the Government. On this ground, the Petitioner right to claim regularisation, cannot be denied. 6. Hence, there will be a direction to the respondents to regularise the Petitioner's appointment as Full Time Night Watchman with effect from 10.02.1995 and thereby pay all consequential benefits due and payable to him. Such order shall be passed in this regard within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 7. Hence, there will be a direction to the respondents to regularise the Petitioner's appointment as Full Time Night Watchman with effect from 10.02.1995 and thereby pay all consequential benefits due and payable to him. Such order shall be passed in this regard within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 7. In view of the fact that the subject matter in issue in the present Writ Petition in W.P.No.31991 of 2012 (filed by the Petitioner) viz., regularisation/confirmation of appointment of Full Time Night Watchman, is covered by the orders, dated 04.04.2013 in W.P.No.26037 of 2012 and dated 29.08.2013 in W.P.No.26127 of 2012, this Court, following the same, direct the Respondents 1 and 2 to regularise the Petitioner's appointment as 'Full Time Night Watchman' with effect from 20.07.1994 and to shower him all consequential monetary attendant benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With the aforesaid direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.