ORDER : 1. This writ petition has been filed by seven persons originally challenging the impugned order passed by the respondent-Chairman cum Managing Director of Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited in proceedings No. AE3/23706/07 dated 5.4.2007, to quash the same in so far as it has deprived the petitioners of their Medical allowance, Washing allowance, Tea and Dust allowances, surrender of earned leave and encashment of earned leave on death/retirement, Leave Travel Concession and appointment on compassionate ground in case of an employee who dies while in service and consequently to restore the benefits from 5.4.2007 with all attendant benefits. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioners had taken out M.P. Nos. 1 to 4 of 2013 seeking (i) to implead the State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary to Government, Food, Co-operation and Consumer Protection Department, Chennai as the second respondent in the writ petition; (ii) to amend the prayer for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the G.O. Ms. No. 213, Food, Co-operation and Consumer Protection (A1) Department dated 15.10.1998 of the second respondent along with the consequential proceeding No. AE3/23706/07 dated 5.4.2007 of the first respondent herein, quash both the orders in so far as it has deprived the petitioners of their Medical allowance, Washing allowance, Tea and Dust allowances, surrender of earned leave and encashment of earned leave on death/retirement, Leave Travel Concession and appointment on compassionate ground in case of an employee who dies while in service and consequently restore the benefits from 5.4.2007 with all attendant benefits; (iii) to dispense with the production of the certified copy of the G.O. Ms. No. 213, Food, Co-operation and Consumer Protection (A1) Department dated 13.10.1998 of the second respondent; (iv) to permit the petitioners to raise additional grounds in the writ petition, respectively. Accepting the prayer of the petitioners, this Court, by order dated 21.6.2013, ordered all the petitions and accordingly, the amendment was carried out in the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioners, challenging the impugned orders, submitted that when all the petitioners were working as casual labourers in the first respondent-Corporation, they were absorbed and regularised in the service of the Corporation as Packers in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200, in pursuance of the order passed by this Court, with effect from 28.6.2000. Learned counsel for the petitioners, challenging the impugned orders, submitted that when all the petitioners were working as casual labourers in the first respondent-Corporation, they were absorbed and regularised in the service of the Corporation as Packers in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200, in pursuance of the order passed by this Court, with effect from 28.6.2000. Thereupon, they were all given all the benefits as per the service conditions applicable to regular Packers in the first respondent-Corporation. When there is only one post called 'Packer' and it belongs to Class IV, Category 3, once a person is absorbed and regularised as Packer, there is no further distinction amongst the Packers. When all the petitioners were put on probation and were declared to have satisfactorily completed the period of probation with effect from 27.6.2002, on being regularised, they are entitled to get the benefits of medical allowance, washing allowance, tea and dust allowance, surrender of earned leave, leave travel concession, surrender of earned leave at the time of retirement/death, appointment on compassionate ground, since these benefits are extended to the regular Packers. When there is no discrimination maintained by the first respondent in the matter of extending the aforementioned facilities to the regular Packers, by the impugned order dated 5.4.2007, the first respondent had withdrawn all the aforementioned benefits citing the suggestion made by the Committee constituted for considering the extension of benefits to the Packers absorbed from casual labourers and the impugned order also declared the petitioners as ineligible to get the aforementioned benefits. 2. The learned counsel further submitted that the service regulations of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited defines a regular employee as one whose probation has been declared to have been satisfactorily completed in any post of the Corporation. In the case of the petitioners, when all of them had become the regular employees, they are eligible to get the benefits attached to the post without any discrimination. Therefore, as the fringe benefits being part of the service conditions, it makes no difference among the employees. Therefore, the medical allowance, washing allowance, tea and dust allowance etc., which are given to the regular and absorbed employees, cannot be denied to the petitioners, when they have also become the regular and absorbed employees of the first respondent-Corporation in terms of the service regulations of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited. Therefore, the medical allowance, washing allowance, tea and dust allowance etc., which are given to the regular and absorbed employees, cannot be denied to the petitioners, when they have also become the regular and absorbed employees of the first respondent-Corporation in terms of the service regulations of the Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited. Adding further, it was stated that when the petitioners were all along enjoying the aforementioned benefits from the date of their absorption, by the impugned orders, the respondents cannot withdraw the benefits granted to them. On this basis, he prayed for setting aside the impugned orders. 3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent, in support of the impugned order, submitted that when the petitioners were all working in the first respondent-Corporation as casual labourers, the Board took a decision in the 276th meeting held on 23.9.97 to regularise the casual labourers. Only in pursuance of the decision taken by the Board on 23.9.97, all the petitioners along with other casuals were absorbed as Packers in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200 on the following conditions, namely, (a) that they are not entitled for any claim equating them to the existing Packers of TNCSC and they should have the physical capacity; (b) though they were absorbed as Packers in the existing vacancy, they cannot be termed as regular one and their post will lapse and cease as and when they retire on superannuation or on resignation or in the event of death and (c) they shall undergo probation for a period of two years from the date of their appointment. Thereafter, the services of the petitioners were also regularised and after they were absorbed as Packers in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200 subject to the above conditions as per the proceedings of the Chairman cum Managing Director dated 23.6.2000, the Board took a decision to make a distinction between the employees who had come through the employment exchange and others who had come from the casual labourers. 2550-55-2660-60-3200 subject to the above conditions as per the proceedings of the Chairman cum Managing Director dated 23.6.2000, the Board took a decision to make a distinction between the employees who had come through the employment exchange and others who had come from the casual labourers. Therefore, the Board framed a policy on regularisation of the casual labourers considering this aspect and finally, in the 311th meeting held on 21.7.2000, the Board resolved and approved a policy for regularisation of the casual labourers in the Corporation by fixing the cut-off date for assessing the eligibility as on 30.6.2000, among other things. Only on the basis of the above meeting held on 21.7.2000 fixing the cut-off date as 30.6.2000 for assessing the eligibility for regularisation of the casual labourers, it was decided to extend only certain welfare benefits like leave, pension, gratuity, employees contributory provident fund, special provident fund, family benefit fund, health fund and advances etc. to the Packers absorbed from casual labourers. Further, it was also decided in the said meeting not to extend the following benefits to the Packers absorbed from casual labourers, namely, surrender of 15 days earned leave per annum; medical allowance, washing allowance; hill allowance; tea allowance; dust allowance; leave travel concession; earned leave surrender at the time of retirement/death and appointment on compassionate grounds. As the petitioners are not legally entitled to the above benefits prior to 5.4.2007, these benefits were wrongly and inadvertently extended to them. Therefore, they were sought to be withdrawn by the impugned order. Therefore, it was pleaded that the petitioners cannot come to this Court on the ground that they have got an accrued right, which has been taken away by the impugned order passed by the first respondent. This Court is neither able to accept the submissions made by the learned counsel for the first respondent nor the reasonings given in the impugned order. When it is an admitted case that the Board in the 276th meeting held on 23.9.97 had decided to absorb and regularise the services of all the casual labourers, resultantly, all the petitioners were also absorbed as Packers in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200 by the proceedings of the Chairman cum Managing Director dated 31.12.99, the respondents cannot make a distinction between the permanent employees who were recruited through the employment exchange and absorbed from the casual labourers. 2550-55-2660-60-3200 by the proceedings of the Chairman cum Managing Director dated 31.12.99, the respondents cannot make a distinction between the permanent employees who were recruited through the employment exchange and absorbed from the casual labourers. Once the Board decided to absorb and regularise the petitioners as Packers on the conditions mentioned in the proceedings No. E8/109053/95 of the Chairman cum Managing Director dated 31.12.99, what was enjoyed by the petitioners on the date of regularisation cannot be deprived of or withdrawn by the impugned order on the ground that they are not eligible to get the benefits, which have been extended to the regular employees, since they were absorbed from casual labourers. Moreover, the reason that they were inadvertently extended the aforementioned benefits, therefore, they were sought to be withdrawn, is also not a good ground. As mentioned above, it is an admitted case that all the petitioners came to the first respondent Corporation as casual labourers. Subsequent to the order passed by this Court, the Board took a decision to regularise their services as Packers in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2550-55-2660-60-3200 with effect from 28.6.2000. From the date of regularisation, when they were enjoying the benefits, it is absolutely unfair and unjust for the respondents to say that the petitioners were given the benefits inadvertently before 5.4.2007, when they were already given the benefits from the date of their regularisation from 28.6.2000. After seven years, by passing the impugned order, the respondents cannot withdraw the benefits as prayed for in the writ petition. In view of the above, the writ petition stands allowed and the impugned orders are set aside. The respondents are directed to restore the benefits, as prayed for in the writ petition, to the petitioners on receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, M.P. No. 1 of 2008 is closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.