The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioners were entitled to the benefits under G.O.Ms.No.198 and G.O.Ms.No.199, and that the respondents' arguments of estoppel and laches were not valid.

1. The petitioners in W.P.No.9586 of 2011 are employed as Watchmen cum Water Suppliers and the petitioners in W.P.No.10082 of 2011 are employed as Electrician GradeII, in the third respondent Municipality. All the petitioners are employed in the third respondent Municipality on daily wage basis initially.

2. The Government of Tamil Nadu issued an order in G.O.Ms.No.199, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 12.08.1997 granting powers to the Director of Municipal Administration for creation of the posts of Sanitary Workers in Municipalities and to appoint in those posts the Sanitary Workers employed on daily wages as on 31.12.1996, on consolidated pay for three years. After completion of three years service on consolidated pay, the Government would decide on the regularisation of their services, based on the assessment on the performance of their service.

3. The Government of Tamil Nadu issued another order in G.O.Ms.No.198, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 26.10.1998 granting consolidated pay to seven categories of employees working in Town Panchayats and Municipalities, on daily wage basis. The said G.O. contemplates regularisation of service of those employees, who are brought to consolidated pay, on their completion of three years of service, if their services are satisfactory.

4. Based on the assessment report of the concerned Municipality, appropriate orders would be passed by the Government regularising the services of Sanitary Workers and the workers belonging to other categories by fixing them on time scale of pay. The said Government Orders also provide for 5% increase in the consolidated pay, for every year, up to three years.

5. Based on the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.198, the petitioners were appointed in the year 1998 on consolidated pay. The third respondent Municipality has made recommendations to the second respondent for regularising the services of the petitioners, on their completion of three years of service.

6. However, the petitioners and Sanitary Workers were not regularised on completion of three years of service in consolidated pay on the ground that there was ban on recruitment imposed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.212, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 29.11.2001.

7. After the ban was lifted in G.O.Ms.No.14, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 07.02.2006, the Government issued an order in G.O.Ms.No.21, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 23.02.2006, granting regularisation to all the Sanitary Workers and the workers belonging to other categories, who were appointed on consolidated pay, with effect from the date of the issuance of the said G.O. Based on the same, the third respondent passed an order dated

27.02.2006 granting time scale of pay to the petitioners and the Sanitary Workers with effect from 27.02.2006.

8. While G.O.Ms.No.199 of the first respondent relates to Sanitary Workers employed in various Municipalities, G.O.Ms.No.198 relates to seven categories of employees working in Town Panchayats and Municipalities. Both the Government Orders provides for consolidated pay for three years to daily wage Sanitary Workers / other categories of workers and for time scale of pay on completion of three years in consolidated pay. According to the petitioners, both the Government Orders are identical.

9. In these circumstances, the Sanitary Workers employed in Palladam Municipality, who were granted the time scale of pay in February 2006, pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.21, referred to above, filed a writ petition in W.P.No.25620 of 2006 seeking to quash the order dated 27.02.2006 of the Palladam Municipality, regularising their services with effect from 23.02.2006 and for a consequential direction to grant them regularisation on completion of three years of service, on consolidated pay. The said writ petition was allowed by this Court on 17.09.2008. The matter was taken before the Divisio