Court quashed the Government order rejecting regularization of petitioner's services. Directing respondents to regularize petitioner's services as a driver from the date of initial appointment with all consequential benefits within eight weeks.
Quashing of impugned letter dated 25.08.2015 and direction to regularize services from 30.04.2004.
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.
W.P.No.2015 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
W.P.No.2015 of 2017 and
W.M.P.Nos.2018 & 2019 of 2017
U.Selvam
...Petitioner
-Vs-
...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of
1/6
W.P.No.2015 of 2017
the 1st respondent in Letter No.2567/A1/2011-5 dated 25.08.2015 and quash the same and direct the respondents to regularize the petitioner in the regular time scale of pay with effect from the date when he was initially appointed with all consequential attendant benefits and monetary benefits on par with the drivers appointed subsequent to the petitioner in regular time scale of pay.
For Petitioner : Mr.Adithya Reddy
For Respondents : M/s.K.Vasanthamala, Government Advocate
ORDER
Heard Mr.Adithya Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and
K.Vasanthamala, learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
petitioner herein was appointed as a Driver on 30.04.2004 on daily wage basis. Through a letter dated 10.02.2011, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chennai had recommended to the Government for regularizing the services of the petitioner from the date of his appointment. Since there was no further action to the recommendation on the part of the Government, the
present writ petition has been filed.
2/6
W.P.No.2015 of 2017
W.P.No.2015 of 2017
also similarly placed as that of P.Subramani, he would also be entitled for the benefit of regularization.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
07.12.2022
Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order hvk
4/6
W.P.No.2015 of 2017
To
5/6
W.P.No.2015 of 2017
M.S.RAMESH,J.
hvk
W.P.No.2015 of 2017
07.12.2022
6/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a driver appointed on daily wage basis is eligible for regularization of services when the recommending department's suggestion was implemented for similarly placed drivers in a related matter
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
P.Subramani Vs. The State of Tamil NaduReferred¶4
P.Subramani Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department passed in W.P.No.1650 of 2016
U.Selvam
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Commercial Taxes & Registration Department
M.S.RAMESH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
