Allowed

K.Murugan, v. Government of Tamilnadu

Madras HC17 Sept 2014WP/25271/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court directed respondents to regularise petitioners as Forest Watchers despite height deficiency, granting pay fixation from juniors' promotion date. Court ordered appointment completion within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to consider petitioners for Forest Watcher post with height relaxation; appoint within eight weeks; pay fixation from junior promotion date.

K.Murugan, Vs Government of Tamilnadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 17.09.2014

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.S.RAMANATHAN

¶5

W.P.Nos.25271 to 25278 of 2014

¶6

W.P.No.25271 of 2014
K.Murugan ...Petitioner in WP.No.25271/14
1.P.Chinnasamy
2.K.Annadurai
3.P. Rengaraj ...Petitioners in WP.No.25272/14
1.C.Ponraj
2.V.Veerappan ...Petitioners in WP.No.25273/14
1.S.Perumal
2.S.Rajagopal
3.S.Yogeswaran ...Petitioners in WP.No.25274/14
1.M.Kasilingam
2.A.S.Paneer Selvam
3.V.Irularasu
4.R.Munusamy
5.K.Mani
6.K.Subramani
7.D.Ramalingam ...Petitioners in WP.No.25275/14
A.Sekar ...Petitioner in WP.No.25276/14
M.R.Gunasekaran ...Petitioner in WP.No.25277/14
M.Ramadoss ...Petitioner in WP.No.25278/14
..vs..
1.Government of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by its Secretary,
Environment and Forest Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests,
Panagal Building, Saidapet,
Chennai – 600 015.
3.The District Forest Officer,
Tirunelveli,
Tirunelveli District. ...Respondents

¶7

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶8

The Divisional Forest Officer Social Forestry Division Tiruchirappalli District. ...3rd Respondent in WP.25272/14 The District Forest Officer, Pudukottai District. ...3rd Respondent in WP.25273/14 The District Forest Officer, Villupuram District. ...3rd Respondent in WP.25275/14

¶9

The Divisional Forest Officer, Social Forestry Division, Salem Circle and District. ...3rd Respondent in WP.25276/14

¶10

The District Forest Officer, The Nilgiris South Forest Division, Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris. ...3rd Respondent in WP.25278/14

¶11

WP.No.25271/2014: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner in the cadre post of Forest Watcher, by giving relaxation with respect to height by extending the benefit of G.O.(2D) Ms.No.56, Environment and Forest Department dated 06.04.2006 on the basis of the order dated 04.12.2012 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6327 of 2005 with all service and monetary benefits within a time limit.

¶12

WP.No.25272 to 25275/2014 and 25277/2014: For the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, it is prayed by the petitioner that this Honourable Court may be pleased to issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of Writ of Mandamus Directing the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner in the cadre Post of Forest Watcher, by giving relaxation with respect to height with effect from 07.08.2009 within a time limit.

¶13

WP.No.25276/2014: Pleased to issue a writ, direction or Order in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, Directing the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner in the cadre Post of Forest Watcher, by giving relaxation with respect to height by extending the benefit of G.O.(2D) Ms. No.56, Environment and Forest Department dated 06.04.2006 on the basis of the order dated 04.12.2012 passed by this Court in WP.No.6327 of 2005 with all service and monetary benefits.

¶14

WP.No.25278/2014: Pleased to issue a writ, direction or Order in the nature of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records culminated in the proceedings in Na.Ka.PA2/1498/2014 dt.6.3.2014 on the file of the third respondent, set aside the same and consequently direct the Respondents to appoint the Petitioner in the cadre Post of Forest Watcher, by giving relaxation with respect to height, with effect from 07.08.2009 within a time limt.

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Mani

¶17

For respondents : Mr.N.Inbanathan, Government Advocate

¶18

COMMON ORDER

¶19

The present Writ Petitions are filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners in the cadre post of Forest Watcher, by giving relaxation with respect to height by extending the benefit of G.O.(2D) Ms.No.56, Environment and Forest Department, dated 06.04.2006 on the basis of the order dated 04.12.2012 passed by this Court in W.P.No.6327 of 2005 with all service and monetary benefits

¶20

2.By G.O.Ms.No.95, Environment and Forest Department dated 7.8.2009, the services of the petitioners were regularised as Plot Watchers. The petitioners are eligible for further promotion as Forest Watchers, but, they were not considered for the post and therefore, Writ Petitions have been filed to direct the respondents to regularise the service of petitioners in the cadre of Forest Watcher on par with their Juniors.

¶21

3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court passed an order in W.P.No.6327 of 2005, dated 4.12.2012, directing the respondents therein to consider the case of the petitioners for regularisation as Forest Watcher, without disqualifying him on the ground of height.

¶22

Learned Government Advocate for the respondents submitted that the petitioners do not possess minimum physical standard prescribed under the Subordinate service Rules viz. 163cms height for appointment to the post of Forest Watcher and therefore, no relaxation can be given to the petitioners. The learned Government Advocate also submitted that nearly 3000 employees are having such defect and their services were not regularised as Forest Watcher and therefore, the petitioners cannot be given regularisation as Forest Watcher.

¶23

5.Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.

¶24

I am unable to accept the submissions made by the learned Government Advocate. It is seen from the order passed in W.P.No.6327 of 2005 dated 4.2.2012, wherein similar issue was considered by this Court and the respondents were directed to consider the regularisation of services of the petitioner as Forest Watcher. As per G.O.Ms.No.64, Environment and Forest Department dated 08.03.1999, Plot Watchers who have been served in the Forest Department for long number of years, are directed to be posted in regular post of Forest watcher and the petitioners are also working in the Forest Department as Plot Watchers for a long https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

period. Further, it is seen from the above Judgment that relaxation was given in respect of some of the persons and appointed them as Forest Watchers. In the Judgment rendered in W.P.No.10349 of 2012 also, the same issue was considered and the respondents were directed to regularise the appointment of the petitioner as Forest Watcher in that writ Petition.

¶26

Considering the same, the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner and appoint them as Forest watchers and it is also made clear that the petitioners are entitled for monetary benefits of that appointment only from the date on which they join duty. As far as fixation of pay is concerned, the petitioners are entitled from the date on which their juniors were promoted till they actually joins the post and pay can be fixed notionally. This direction with regard to pay fixation is given taking into account the fact that after serving for long number of years in the respondent Department, if appointment is directed to be given with effect from today, the petitioners may not have pensionary and other benefits, even to a certain extent also, on their retirement. Hence, the respondents are directed to complete the exercise of giving appointment orders to the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any relaxation of the Rule is necessary as was done in the case of Sivanesan by G.O.(2D) No.56, Environment and Forest Department dated 06.09.2006, the respondents are directed to take appropriate steps and to get relaxation of the Rules.

¶27

With the above direction and observation, the Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶28

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) Dated:24 .09.2014

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

¶32

1.The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Environment and Forest Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶33

2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015.

¶34

3.The District Forest Officer, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶36

4.The Divisional Forest Officer Social Forestry Division Tiruchirappalli District.

¶37

5.The District Forest Officer,
Pudukottai District.
6.The District Forest Officer,
Villupuram District.
7.The Divisional Forest Officer,
Social Forestry Division,
Salem Circle and District.
8.The District Forest Officer,
The Nilgiris South Forest Division,
Udhagamandalam, Nilgiris.
+8 cc to Mr.S.Mani, Advocate,SR.44646 to 44652 & 44653.
+8 cc to the Special Government Pleader,SR.44699 to 44706.
bky(co)
krd 26/9
W.P.Nos.25271 to 25278 of 2014

¶38

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

K.Murugan, v. Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Murugan, v. Government of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Palanisamy, Vs the District Manager

A.Mathiyazhagan Vs Elangovan

S.Madhavan Vs M.Vijayakumar I.A.S

N.Velayutham Vs The Managing Director

Rajasekar Vs the Chief Engineer/

B. Ramachandran Vs The Secretary to the