Union of India, v. The Registrar
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court dismissed a writ petition seeking quashing of an OTA allowing service regularization from the date of initial casual appointment, finding no break in service despite role changes. The Tribunal's order was confirmed.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RESERVED ON: 18-08-2016
DELIVERED ON: 07-09-2016
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.SELVAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.KALAIYARASAN
Writ Petition No.19907 of 2016
and W.M.P.No.17161 of 2016
1. Union of India
Rep. by the Principal Chief Postmaster General
Tamil Nadu Circle, Chennai – 600 002
2. The Postmaster General
Western Region, TN
Coimbatore 641 002
3. Director of Postal Services
Western Region, TN
Coimbatore 641 002
4. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices
Salem West Division
Salem 636 005 .. Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Registrar
The Central Administrative Tribunal
Madras Bench
Chennai
2. P. Dhanavel .. Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Certiorari calling for the records in respect of the impugned order made in O.A.No.310/00061/2014 dated 13-08-2015 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same and to pass further orders.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the services of a casual driver appointed in 1985, who was later appointed as cleaner and then driver in 2005 without any break, can be regularized from the date of initial appointment.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Union of India
- respondent
The Registrar, The Central Administrative Tribunal
- respondent
P. Dhanavel
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court