Disposed

P.Subramani, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC15 Nov 2019WP/32134/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners, appointed as Plot Watchers/Social Forestry Workers in 1986 and brought into time scale in 2003, filed writ petitions seeking regularisation as regular Forest Watchers based on prior judgments. The Court, without examining merits, directed the Government to consider representations and pass orders within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direct response of respondents to consider representations and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

P.Subramani, Vs Government of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 15.11.2019 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.Nos.32134 & 32139 of 2019 and W.M.P.Nos.32412 & 32422 of 2019

W.P.No.32134 of 2019

1.P.Subramani

2.K.Gajendran

3.T.Mohan 4.M.Arumugam 5.M.Palani 6.G.Chinnadurai 7.S.Sekar 8.M.Muthu 9.B.Elumalai 10.S.Selvaraj 11.P.Rajendran 12.A.Manoharan

¶6

13.L.Rajangam 14.A.Sivan 15.M.Mariappan 16.A.Mahalingam 17.P.R.Ganesan 18.R.Vijayan 19.P.Samirajan 20.M.Samappan ... Petitioners

¶7

1/5

¶8

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

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Environment and Forest Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009 2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015 ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to appoint the petitioners as regular time scale Forest Watchers taking into account of their seniority and qualification, on par with their Juniors in the light of the orders passed in W.P.No.15561 of 2006 dated 10.03.2008, W.A.No.690 of 2008 dated 13.10.2009, W.P.No.23374 of 2008 dated 30.10.2009, W.A.No.607 of 2010 dated 29.03.2010 and proceedings of the second respondent dated 07.01.2011 and confer all consequential benefits.

¶12

W.P.No.32139 of 2019 1.A.Chendrayan 2.G.Kottai Thai 3.D.Veeramalai 4.A.Karichiyappan 5.S.Natarajan 6.M.Ponnusamy 7.S.Settu 8.D.Karuna 9.G.Kottai Thai 10.K.Ramasamy 11.S.Kandeeban 12.M.Muniyammal 13.S.Valli 14.K.Chinathambi 15.R.Radhakrishnan 16.T.Muthusamy 17.P.Adimoolam 18.B.Nagarajan 19.T.Vellaisamy 20.Selvaajan ... Petitioners 2/5

¶13

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

Vs.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.Mani For Respondents : Mr.M.Elumalai, Government Advocate COMMON O R D E R

¶18

By consent, these writ petitions are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

¶19

2.The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners were appointed on daily wage basis in the Forest Department as Plot Watchers / Social Forestry Worker. The above said post is a non-cadre post in which more than 3000 persons have been appointed throughout the State, during the relevant period. Though they were appointed in the year 1986, thereafter in the year 2003 to 2012 they were brought into time scale of pay in the cadre post of Forest Watcher and rendered service for more than two decades. Similarly situated persons already filed W.P.Nos.15561 of 2006 and 23374 of 2008, which were allowed on 31.10.2009. Aggrieved by the said order, the State preferred appeal and the same were dismissed in W.A.Nos.690 of 2008 and 607 of 2010 on 29.03.2010. Therefore in order to avail such benefit, the petitioners made representation on 28.01.2019 and

¶20

3/5

¶21

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

¶22

30.06.2019 for regularisation of their services, but till date the same have not been considered. Hence, the petitioners have filed the present petitions.

¶23

3.Heard both sides.

¶24

4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that it would suffice if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 28.01.2019 and 30.06.2019 and pass orders, within a stipulated time fixed by this Court.

¶25

5.Though the petitioners have sought for a larger relief, this Court without going into the merits of the case, directs the respondents to consider the representations of the petitioners dated 28.01.2019 and 30.06.2019 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶26

6.With the above direction, the writ petitions stand disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs. -s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar lok To 1.The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Environment and Forest Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009 2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai – 600 015

¶27

4/5

¶28

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

¶29

+1 cc to the Special Government Pleader (Forest) sr 95030

¶30

+40 ccs to Mr.S.Mani Advocate sr94801

¶31

W.P.Nos.32134 & 32139 of 2019

¶32

aa27/12/2019

¶33

5/5

¶34

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

P.Subramani, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Subramani, v. Government of Tamil Nadu

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.Srinivasan Vs the Collector

D.Ezhilan Vs Director General of Police

Dr.K.Sathesh Kumar Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

K.Perumal Vs N.Manikannan

K.v.Santhosh Vs Union Of India

R.Sekar Daniel Vs The Tamil Nadu State Transport