Allowed

Pandi.D v. the Tamil Nadu State Transport

Madras HC2 Nov 2022WP(MD)/19379/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed a writ petition challenging an order that regularized the petitioner's service with a delayed effective date, quashing it in favor of a prior decision granting permanent status and benefits from the actual start of service upon completion of the requisite period.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; petitioner granted permanent status and consequential benefits from completion of 720 days from 01.08.2008.

Pandi.D Vs the Tamil Nadu State Transport — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.19379 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.11.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.19379 of 2021

¶7

D.Pandi ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd., Represented by its Managing Director, Bye Pass Road, Madurai.

¶10

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd;, Virudhunagar Region, Virudhunagar. ... Respondents

¶11

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Ref.No.TNSTC/Virudhu/Nirvagam/A2/881/2019 dated 25.01.2019, quash the same in so far as bringing the petitioner to daily paid service form 01.09.2010 and regularizing and confirming his service only from 26.07.2018 and consequently direct the respondents to confirm and regularize his services with effect from 01.01.2010 with arrears and all other consequential benefits.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rahul

¶13

For Respondents : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh

¶14

1/4

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P(MD)No.19379 of 2021

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶19

The petitioner joined the respondent Corporation as Reserve Crew Driver on 01.08.2008. The vehicle driven by him was involved in an accident. However, the criminal court which tried the case acquitted the writ petitioner. In the mean while, the petitioner moved the authority under Tamil Nadu Act 46 of 1981 seeking conferment of his permanent status. The said authority passed an award in favour of the writ petitioner on 11.03.2013. Questioning the same, the Management filed W.P.(MD)No.11211 of 2013. Even during the pendency of the said writ petition, the impugned order dated 25.01.2019 was passed granting permanent status of the writ petitioner with effect from 26.07.2018. Questioning the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶20

The issue raised in the writ petition has already been decided in W.P. (MD)No.11211 of 2013. A learned Judge of this Court vide order dated 02.09.2022 disposed of the writ petition filed by the Management in the following terms:-

¶21

“19. In the said order, A.Anand, a similarly placed person like second respondent was ordered to be conferred with permanent status on completion of 720 days and regulation of his pay and allowances. No doubt, the second

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

2/4

¶24

W.P(MD)No.19379 of 2021

¶25

respondent is also entitled for the same relief.

¶26

In view of the matter, this Court confirms the order of the first respondent in Pa.Mu.No.A/2382/2012, dated 11.03.2013 and directs the petitioner Corporation to confer the permanent status on the second respondent on completion of 720 days as indicated in W.A.(MD)No.1062 of 2016 and W.P. (MD)No.11210 of 2013 and 18585 of 2014 with consequential service and monetary benefits within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”

¶27