JUDGMENT :

(Common Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to appoint the petitioner on permanent basis with effect from 27.05.1999 on consolidated basis for one year and thereafter the said period of one year, to place the petitioner on time scale of pay with all consequential benefits.)

The relief sought for in the present writ petitions is to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners on permanent basis with effect from 27.05.1999 on consolidated basis for one year and thereafter, the said period of one year, to place the petitioners on time scale of pay with all consequential benefits.

2. The petitioners state that they have joined as Nominal Muster Roll (NMR) daily wage employees in the 3rd respondent/Municipality. The services of the writ petitioners were not regularised, despite the fact that they were continuously working as daily wage employees. The petitioners sent representations on 04.08.2008 and no orders were passed. Thus, the writ petitioners filed the writ petitions in W.P.Nos.22772 and 22773 of 2008 and the High Court passed an order on 18.09.2008 directing the respondents to consider the representations of the writ petitioners and pass orders.

3. Consequently, the 2nd respondent passed an order on 23.12.2008, rejecting the request of the writ petitioners to regularise their services. Again, the petitioners filed writ petitions in W.P.Nos.1658 and 1659 of 2009 and this Court passed an order on 02.02.2010, setting aside the rejection order dated 23.12.2008 and remanded the matter back to the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners in terms of G.O.(Ms).No.125 dated 27.05.1999. The 3rd respondent/Municipality preferred an Appeal in W.A.Nos.1529 and 1530 of 2010 and the writ appeals were dismissed on 19.08.2010. The Special Leave Petitions in S.L.P.(Civil).Nos.33756 and 33757 of 2010 were filed by the 3rd respondent/Municipality, which were also dismissed on 24.01.2011 and the petitioners were appointed in the regular post, now the petitioners are working as Regular employees.

4. Not satisfied with the benefit of regularisation granted pursuant to the orders of the Court in proceedings dated 24.01.2011, the petitioners filed the writ petitions on the ground that this Court directed the respondents in W.P.Nos.1658 and 1659 of 2010, to regularize the services of the petitioners in terms of G.O.(Ms).No.125 dated 27.05.1999. As per the said Government order, the petitioners state that they were appointed on 27.05.1999 on consolidated pay of Rs.2000/- and therefore, they should have been placed in the regular time scale of pay with effect from 27.05.2001. However, they were appointed in the permanent post only on 24.02.2011.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioners mainly contended that as per the said G.O.(Ms).No.125, the petitioners are entitled for the retrospective regularisation on completion of one year of consolidated pay services. The said position was reiterated by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.42, 46 and 47 of 2022 dated 01.03.2022. The relief of regular time scale of pay as per G.O.(Ms).No.125 dated 27.05.1999 was granted by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court.

6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents objected the said contention by stating that the issues regarding regularisation of Sanitary Workers appointed in Municipalities on consolidated pay was decided by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of S.Dhanasekaran & 24 Others Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu reported in [2013 (6) CTC 593]. The Full Bench has held that the employees are not entitled for retrospective regularisation from the date of completion of one year of service or three years of service. Again, a Review Petition was filed and the Full Bench of this Court allowed the Review Petition and granted the benefit of retrospective regularisation on completion of three years of service