TANGEDCO appealed against a single judge's order directing conferment of permanent status on a casual workman. The appeal was disposed of in line with an earlier Division Bench decision: permanent status benefit is restricted to the actual period of employment after completion of 480 days in 24 calendar months.
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.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 07.02.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN
W.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
Vs.
Page 1 of 6
W.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
Karur.
1.The Inspector of Labour, Karur. .. 1st Respondent/4th Respondent 2.M.Annadurai .. 2nd Respondent/Writ Petitioner
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 01.04.2015 passed in W.P.(MD).No.15852 of 2012.
For Appellants : Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co. For R-1 : Mr.A.K.Manikkam Special Government Pleader For R-2 : No appearance
JUDGMENT
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.
The present Writ Appeal is filed by TANGEDCO being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD).No.15852 of 2012 dated 01.04.2015.
second respondent workmen engaged by TANGEDCO. The second
Page 2 of 6
W.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
respondent, who is the writ petitioner, pleaded that he was appointed as a casual employee with effect from 01.11.1997 by TANGEDCO in Karur and Kulithalai Electricity Distribution Circle and having worked for more than 480 days in 24 calendar months, he is entitled to be conferred under permanent status. The Inspector of Labour, after considering the plea and the objections raised by the TANGEDCO claiming that the second respondent is working under contract and he is a contract labour and not a casual employee directly engaged by the TANGEDCO, negatived the plea raised by the TANGEDCO. Similar Writ Petitions by the employee and Writ Petition by the TANGEDCO challenging the order of the Inspector of Labour were subject matter of challenge in the batch of Writ Petitions and Writ Appeals.
W.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Vs. Inspector of Labour
and others reported in 2022 SCC Online Mad 1003, would submit that in view of this judgment, various other Division Benches of this Court have disposed of the appeals preferred by the TANGEDCO with a clarification that the benefit as to the consequences thereupon would only be for the period of employment and if any of the workmen is discontinued or not in service, he would be entitled to the benefit only for the period of service and not beyond that and that too, after the completion of the continuous
service of 480 days in 24 calendar months and not for the prior period.
(G.J.,J.) (C.K.,J.) 07.02.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Lm Page 4 of 6
W.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
To
The Inspector of Labour, Karur.
Page 5 of 6
W.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J. and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.
Lm
W.A.(MD).No.46 of 2016
07.02.2024
Page 6 of 6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the workman engaged by TANGEDCO is entitled to conferment of permanent status under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status) rules after 480 days of service in
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited
The Chief Engineer (Recruitment), TANGEDCO
The Superintending Engineer, Karur Electricity Distribution Circle, TANGEDCO
The Inspector of Labour, Karur
M.Annadurai
G.Jayachandran
C.Kumarappan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
