SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 913

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. Subramaniam, J.
A. Anthonydoss and ors. - Petitioners
Versus
Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu and ors. – Respondents
W.P.No.11840 of 2018 and W.M.P.No.13839 of 2018
Decided On : 01-12-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. M. Gnanasekar
For the Respondent:Mr. S. Rajesh, Government Advocate

The government's policy decision to reduce call outs for Home Guards was upheld as it was within the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Home Guard Act, 1963, and the petitioners had no right to claim more call outs as it was a volunteer organization.

Headnote:

Home Guards - Reduction of Call Outs - Tamil Nadu Home Guard Act, 1963, Section 3, 5, 6

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners, Home Guards, challenged the reduction of call outs by the government, claiming it affected their livelihood. The government argued that the reduction was a policy decision within the ambit of the Tamil Nadu Home Guard Act, 1963.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the government's decision to reduce call outs was within the provisions of the Home Guard Act and Rules, and the petitioners had no right to claim more call outs as it was a volunteer organization.

Issues: Reduction of call outs for Home Guards, impact on livelihood, and the scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Ratio Decidendi: The government's decision to reduce call outs for Home Guards was a policy decision within the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Home Guard Act, 1963, and the petitioners had no right to claim more call outs as it was a volunteer organization.

Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed, and the petitioners were not awarded any costs. The court found no acceptable ground for interfering with the government's decision.

ORDER :

The amended prayer in the present writ petition is to call for the records relating to G.O.Ms.No.115 Home (Pol.14) Department dated 19.02.2019 passed by the 14th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to give call outs to the petitioners throughout the month prior to issuance of G.O.Ms.No.703 Home (Pol.4) Department dated 15.09.2017.

2. The petitioners were appointed as Home Guards in the year 2011. The petitioners underwent training for CD Annexure Fire Fighting and Basic Fire and accordingly, performing the duties arising to them effectively. The petitioners state that they are the holders of meritorious services as Home Guards. While so, through the impugned order, the respondents have reduced the call outs and thereby depriving the petitioners from earning wages on par with Home Guards in other States. Prior to the issuance of the impugned Government order, the petitioners were provided 25 days of call outs for a month. However, the number of call outs have been reduced drastically, so as to deprive the petitioners from performing duties and earning charges.

3. The petitioners are performing the works related to regulating the traffic, worked as drivers in the Police Force, security duty at the residence of VVIPs, patrolling duty during odd hours, regulating the flow of traffic during festive seasons and other connected works. No doubt, the duty allowance to Home Guards were increased pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. However, the number of call outs have been reduced and therefore, the petitioners were constrained to move the present writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners mainly contended that in respect of other States, Home Guards are not only given higher salary based on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, but also getting call outs for all the 30 days in the month. The Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, directed the State of Tamil Nadu and all other States to implement the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court of India. Even the Government of India observed that the State of Tamil Nadu is paying lesser rate of duty allowance to the Home Guards, which is lesser than the minimum wages. However, the wages to the Home Guards were increased pursuant to the orders of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India and as per the directives of the Government of India. While increasing the wages, the respondents have reduced the call outs. Such an action of the respondents not in consonance with the spirit of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. When the petitioners were previously provided with 25 days of call outs per month, now it has been reduced to a minimum of 10 days per month and provided duties are not more than 4 hours for one call out. Wages of Rs.560/- was fixed for 2 call outs i.e., 8 hours.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner is of an opinion that the services of he Home Guards are utilised by the State for the benefit of the public at large and the Home Guards are performing their duties even during odd hours and therefore, the reduction of call out would affect their livelihood.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner relying on the comparative charts pertaining to various other States, contended that the State of Tamil Nadu is not utilising the services of the Home Guards at an optimum level and even the wages in some other States are higher than the wages now fixed by the Government of Tamil Nadu. Thus, the order impugned is to be set aside and the Scheme, which was existing prior to the existence of the impugned order is to be restored for the benefit of the writ petitioners.

7. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents objected the contentions raised by the petitioners by stating that the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu in letter Rc.No.155539/Genl.2/2016 dated 04.04.2017 and 07.07.2017, the Government have enhanced the Home Guards Duty Allowance from Rs.150/-

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top