The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court disposed of multiple writ petitions seeking appointment or quashing of a notification after the Hon'ble Supreme Court adjudicated the identical issue in a related contempt proceeding.
Writ petitions disposed of; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.
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.(MD) No.8620 of 2021 etc., batch
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 29.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
| W.P. | (MD) Nos.8620 & 8 | 627 of 2021 | and |
|---|---|---|---|
| 22695, | 22708, 22736, 227 | 88 & 22743 | of 2019 |
| and | |||
| W.M.P.(MD) Nos.19 | 451, 19453, 19456 | , 19457, 19 | 483, 19551, 19552, |
| 19494, 19495 | & 19484 of 2019 | and 6489 & |
6495 of 2021 |
| S.Balaprabhu | ... Petitioner | in WP(MD). | 8620/ 2021 |
| Thanush.S | ... Petitioner | in WP(MD). | 8627/ 2021 |
| G. Nandakumar | ... Petitioner | in WP(MD) | . 22695/ 2019 |
| A. Sundaramurthy | ... Petitioner |
in WP(MD) | . 22708/ 2019 |
| A. Murugan | ... Petitioner | in WP(MD) | . 22736/ 2019 |
| G.Palanivelrajan | ... Petitioner | in WP(MD) | . 22788/ 2019 |
| .T.V.Saravanan | ... Petitioner | in WP(MD) | . 22743/ 2019 |
-vs-
1.The Executive Director (Personnel), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Central Office, Mumbai-400 021.
2.The Zonal Manager, Zonal Office, Life Insurance Corporation of India, 152, Anna Saalai, Chennai-600 002.
3.The Senior Divisional Manager, Thanjavur Divisional Office, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jeevan Prakash, Gandhiji Road, Thanjavur-613 001. ... Respondents in WP(MD). 8620/ 2021
1/6
W.P.(MD) No.8620 of 2021 etc., batch
... Respondent in WP(MD). 8627/ 2021
Central Office, Yogak Shema, Mumbai-400021
... Respondents in WP(MD)Nos.. 22695,22708,22736,22788 & 22743/ 2019
Prayer in WP(MD). 8620/ 2021:-
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner (Registration No.1780753078) in the post of Assistant if he is found otherwise eligible by considering his application dated 29.09.2019 in pursuant to the notification of the 3rd respondent dated 17.09.2019.
Prayer in WP(MD). 8627 of 2021 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court S-4. To issue a Writ of Mandamus, writ or direction in the nature of a writ directing the 3rd respondent to appoint the petitioner (Registration No.1780571642) in the post of Assistant if he is found otherwise eligible by considering his application dated 27.09.2019 in pursuant to the notification of the 3rd respondent dated 17.09.2019.
Prayer in WP(MD). 22695, 22708, 22736, 22788, & 22743 of 2019:
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to Call for the records of the 1st respondent Online notification dated 17.09.2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner as per the Honourable Apex Court Judgement reported in (2015) 9 SCC 62 with all the monetary benefits
2/6
W.P.(MD) No.8620 of 2021 etc., batch
In W.P.(MD) Nos.8620 & 8627 of 2021:-
For Petitioner : Mr.Kathirvelu Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.K.Prabhu For Respondents : Mr.G.Prabhurajadurai In W.P.(MD) Nos.22695, 22708 and 22736 of 2019:- For Petitioner : Mr.D.Selvanayagam For Respondents : Mr.G.Prabhurajadurai In W.P.(MD) No. 22788 of 2019:- For Petitioner : Mr.D.Selvanayagam For Respondents : Mr.C.Godwin In W.P.(MD) No.22743 of 2019:-
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Selvanayagam For Respondents : Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi
COMMON ORDER
The issues raised in these writ petitions are no more res integra, as the Hon'ble Supreme Court elaborately considered the issue in Miscellaneous Application No.1150 of 2019 in Contempt Petition (Civil) No.1921 of 2019 in Civil Appeal No.6950 of 2009, dated 27.04.2022 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following order:-
“75. The dispute is now of an antiquity tracing back to nearly four decades. Finality has to be wrung down on the dispute to avoid uncertainty and more litigation. Nearly thirty-one years have elapsed since 1991. We have come to the conclusion that the claims of those workers who are duly found upon verification to meet the threshold conditions of eligibility should be resolved by the award of monetary compensation in lieu of absorption, and in full and final settlement of all claims and demands. Thus, this Court directs the following:
(i) A fresh verification of the claims of workers who claim to have been employed for at least 70 days https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in Class IV posts over a period of three years or 85
3/6
W.P.(MD) No.8620 of 2021 etc., batch
days in Class III posts over a period of two years shall be carried out;
(ii) The verification shall be confined to persons who were working between 20 May 1985 and 4 March 1991;
(iii)All persons who are found to be eligible on the above norm shall be entitled to compensation computed at the rate of Rs 50,000 for every year of service or part thereof. The payment of compensation at the above rate shall be in lieu of reinstatement, and in full and final settlement of all claims and demands of the workers in lieu of regularisation or absorption and notwithstanding the directions issued by this Court in TN Terminated Employees Association (supra);
(iv)In carrying out the process of verification, the Committee appointed by this Court shall not be confined to the certified list before the CGIT and shall consider the claims of all workers who were engaged between 20 May 1985 and 4 March 1991;
(v) For the purpose of verification, LIC shall make available all the records at the Divisional level to the Committee appointed by this Court;
(vi)It will be open to the workers concerned or, as the case may be, the Unions and Associations representing them, to make available such documentary material in their possession for the purpose of verification;
(vii) The process of verification shall be carried out independently without regard to the Dogra Report, which is held to be flawed;
(viii) The payment of compensation in lieu of reinstatement shall be effected by LIC within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the report of verification by the Committee; and
(ix) The task of verification shall be carried out by a Committee consisting of:
(a) Mr Justice P K S Baghel, former Judge of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Allahabad High Court; and
4/6
W.P.(MD) No.8620 of 2021 etc., batch
(b) Shri Rajiv Sharma, former District Judge and member of the UPHJS.
LIC shall provide all logistical assistance to the Committee and bear all expenses, including secretarial expenses, travel and incidental expenses, as well as the fees payable to the members of the Committee. Justice P K S Baghel shall fix the terms of remuneration payable to the members of the Committee.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-II)
// True Copy //
/ /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
ssb/abr
To
1.The Executive Director (Personnel), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Central Office, Mumbai-400 021.
2.The Zonal Manager,
Zonal Office, Life Insurance Corporation of India, 152, Anna Saalai, Chennai-600 002.
3.The Senior Divisional Manager, Thanjavur Divisional Office, Life Insurance Corporation of India, Jeevan Prakash, Gandhiji Road, Thanjavur-613 001.
5/6
W.P.(MD) No.8620 of 2021 etc., batch
5. The Chairman
Life Insurance Corporation of India, Central Office, Yogak Shema, Mumbai-400021
+5 CC to Mr.D.SELVANAYAGAM, Advocate SR.No. 22712 TO 22716 +1 CC to Mr.D.SHANMUGARAJA SETHUPATHI, Advocate SR.No. 22476 +1 CC to Mr.G.GODWIN, Advocate SR.No. 22416 +1 CC to Mr.K.PRABHU, Advocate SR.No. 22791 +1 CC to Mr.G.PRABHU RAJADURAI, Advocate SR.No. 23148
W.P.(MD) Nos.8620 & 8627 of 2021 and 22695, 22708, 22736, 22788 & 22743 of 2019 29.04.2022
SP(CO) TR(25.05.2022) 6P 16C
6/6
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petitions for appointment/quashing notice need to be disposed of after the Supreme Court heard the identical issue in a related contempt case.
Whether the petitioners case merits consideration given the Supreme Court judgment in (2015) 9 SCC 62.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
TN Terminated Employees AssociationFollowed¶33
(2015) 9 SCC 62 · Who else cites this
S.Balaprabhu & others
Life Insurance Corporation of India (Respondents 1-5)
S.M.Subramaniam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
