Dismissed

R.Chellaiah, v. Rural Development Dept. of

Madras HC24 Nov 2020WP(MD)/4295/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of the petitioner's claim for retrospective regularization of services. The Court held that since the petitioner was validly appointed in 2005, mere acquisition of qualification later does not confer a right to retrospective regularization or seniority benefits from the vacancy year.

What did the court decide?

null

R.Chellaiah, Vs Rural Development Dept. of — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.4295 of 2013

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 24.11.2020

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.(MD)No.4295 of 2013 and

¶6

M.P(MD)No.2 of 2013

¶7

R.Chellaiah ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.Rural Development Department of Tamilnadu,

¶10

Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Fort St.George, Chennai – 9.

¶11

2.The Secretary, Tamilnadu Public Service Commission, Chennai – 2. 3.The District Collector, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 3^rd respondent vide A3/70266/2005, dated 31.01.2007 and the consequential impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent vide letter No.18422/E7/2008/11, dated 07.09.2009 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner as Junior Assistant from the year 1996 and grant subsequent seniority benefits to the petitioner.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balakrishnan For Respondents : Mr.V.Anand (R1 and R3) Govt.Advocate For Respondent-2 : Mr.K.K.Senthil

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The order of rejection, rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner to regularize his services in the post of Junior Assistant with effect from 15.07.1991, is under challenge in the present Writ Petition.

¶16

The Writ Petitioner was appointed as Office Assistant on 26.07.1984 and promoted as Record Clerk on 15.07.1991. The petitioner was subsequently appointed as Junior Assistant, with effect from 04.11.2005.

¶17

The grievances of the Writ Petitioner is that the post of Junior Assistant was vacant from the year 1996 onwards, more https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

¶19

W.P.(MD)No.4295 of 2013

¶20

specifically, with effect from 16.09.1996. The petitioner, during the relevant point of time was fully qualified for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant, however, his case was not considered during the relevant point of time. The Original Application filed by him in O.A.No.2472 of 1999, before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, was transferred to the High Court and renumbered as W.P.No.38381 of 2006, which was disposed of on 13.07.2009, directing the respondents therein to consider his representation.

¶21

4.This Court is of the considered opinion that the Writ Petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant with effect from 04.11.2005. Mere acquisition of qualification would not confer any right on the candidates to seek appointment on retrospective regularization. The Writ Petitioner admittedly was appointed as Junior Assistant and posted as Junior Assistant on 04.11.2005 and therefore, he cannot seek retrospective regularization from 15.07.1996, the date on which the post became vacant. The Writ Petitioner cannot claim any right over his appointment to the post of Junior Assistant. In fact, he was working as Junior Assistant from 04.11.2005 onwards and such services were considered and taken up for the purpose of grant of benefits. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled for retrospective regularization in the post of Junior Assistant and accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

MPK

¶26

¶27

1.The Principal Secretary,Rural Development Department of Tamilnadu, Fort St.George,

¶28

Chennai – 9.

¶29

2.The District Collector,

¶30

Tirunelveli District.

¶31

+1 CC to M/s.A.BALA KRISHNAN, Advocate ( SR-22862[F] dated 26/11/2020 )

¶32

W.P.(MD)No.4295 of 2013 24.11.2020

¶33

SV2(CO) AP(03/12/2020) 2P 4C

¶34

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

¶35

R.Chellaiah, v. Rural Development Dept. of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Chellaiah, v. Rural Development Dept. of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.Paulson Vs the Joint Director of

Sudha, Vs the District Collector

S.Murali Babu, Vs the Commissioner of -

St.Antrews Girls Hr. Sec. Vs the Secretary School

Mr. Narayanan, the Secretary Vs the Joint Registrar of

P.Balasubramanian, Vs the President