Disposed

J.Ramesh Babu, v. the State

Madras HC1 Feb 2019WP/17083/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the 3rd respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and pass orders regarding regularization of services within twelve weeks, subject to the appeal pending in the Supreme Court against a previous Division Bench order.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 3rd respondent to consider petitioner's representation and pass orders within twelve weeks regarding service regularization.

J.Ramesh Babu, Vs the State — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01.02.2019 CORAM :

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR

¶3

W.P. No. 17083 of 2011 and M.P. No. 2 of 2011

¶4

J. Ramesh Babu .. Petitioner

¶5

Vs.
1. The State
rep. by its Secretary
Government of Tamil Nadu
Municipal Administration and
Water Supply Department
Fort St. George
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Commissioner of
Municipal Administration
Chepauk
Chennai – 600 005.
3. The Executive Officer
Gudalur 3 rd Grade
Municipality, Gudalur
Nilgris District.
.. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 3 rd
respondent relating to proceedings in Na.Ka. No. 234/06
dated 23.02.2006 and to quash the same in so far as the
date of regularisation of services of the petitioner is
concerned and consequently direct the respondents herein to
regularize the services of the petitioner in time scale of
pay after expiry of three years from the date of
appointment made in pursuant to the Government order issued
in G.O. Ms. No.198 Municipal Administration and Water
Supply Department dated 19.10.2008 and in accordance with
law with all attendant benefits including arrears of salary
with interest and to pass such further orders.

¶6

For Petitioner : Mr.G. Sankaran

¶7

For Respondents : Mr. R. Karthikeyan, Additional Government Pleader

¶8

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

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the proceedings of the 3^rd respondent in Na.Ka. No. 234/06 dated 23.02.2006 in so far as the date of regularisation of services of the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the respondents herein to regularize the services of the petitioner in time scale of pay after expiry of three years from the date of appointment made in pursuant to the Government order issued in G.O. Ms. No.198 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 19.10.2008 and in accordance with law with all attendant benefits including arrears of salary with interest.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in this Writ Petition is squarely covered by the Division Judgement of this Court in W.P. Nos. 688 of 2015 etc. batch of cases, N. Arumugam & 2 ors. vs. R. Ranganathan & Ors. etc., dated 01.09.2015.

¶12

The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that against the aforesaid order, a Review Application was filed and the same has been allowed. Challenging the same, the Government has filed an appeal in SLP No.21935 of 2017, wherein interim order was granted and the matter is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶13

According to learned counsel for the petitioner, relief has been granted to the similarly placed persons and hence the same benefit may be extended to this petitioner also, subject to the result of the appeals pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶14

In the light of the above said submission of the learned counsel for both the parties and the facts of the case, the 3^rd respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 15.09.2010 and pass orders, in accordance with law, taking note of the aforesaid order of this Court in W.P. Nos. 688 of 2015 etc. batch of cases, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶15

The Writ Petition is disposed of, accordingly. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶16

Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶17

//True Copy//

¶18

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶19

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

¶20

avr

¶21

To
1. The Secretary
Government of Tamil Nadu
Municipal Administration and
Water Supply Department
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Commissioner of
Municipal Administration
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
3. The Executive Officer
Gudalur 3 rd Grade
Municipality, Gudalur
Nilgris District.
+1cc to Mr. P.Srinivas, Advocate SR.No. 9289
+1cc to Mr.G. Sankaran , Advocate SR.No. 9194
+1 CC TO GOVERNMENT PLEADER SR.NO. 9744
W.P. No. 17083 of 2011
and
M.P. No. 2 of 2011
A.SK(11/03/2019)

¶22

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

J.Ramesh Babu, v. the State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

J.Ramesh Babu, v. the State

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

C.Rajendran, Vs the Central Registrar of

S. Sekar Vs the Secry to Govt.

The Management of Kancheepuram central cooperative Bank Ltd. Vs The Appellate Authority (under the payment of Gratuity Act)

Tmt. a. Balamani, Vs the Collector

India Radiators Employees Union Vs The Registrar of Trade Unions

T.Sundaramoorthy Vs the State of Tamil Nadu