Appointment on the basis of absorption is impermissible and acquittal in a criminal case does not confer the right to claim absorption with retrospective effect.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 3rd respondent in connection with his proceedings, bearing Ref.No.Ku.No.573/NP12/Voo1/kho./2010 dated 07.01.2010 and quash the same and direct the Respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner with effect from 01.05.1999 with all consequential benefits and pass such further orders.)

1. This writ petition is filed praying for a writ of certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 3rd respondent in connection with his proceedings bearing Ref.No.Ku.No. 573/NP12/Voo1/kho./2010 dated 07.01.2010 and quash the same and direct the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner with effect from 01.05.1999 with all consequential benefits.

2. The Ennore Thermal Power Station was commissioned in the year 1971. The petitioner was in service in Ennore Thermal Power Station since 1981. Thousands of contract labourers were employed by Ennore Thermal Power Station. A commission headed by Justice Khalid was set up to identify contract labourers for absorption. The said Commission identified 18,000 contract labourers for absorption which was accepted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and directions was also issued to Tamil Nadu Electricity Board not to recruit any person until the identified persons are absorbed. A proceedings was issued by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board in Board Proceedings.No.17 dated 28.04.1999 wherein guidelines were issued with regard to absorption of contract workmen in all the four Thermal Power Stations including Ennore Thermal Power Station. In terms of the above said Board Proceedings, contract labourers in the four Thermal Power Stations were directed to be absorbed based on seniority in the list and in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in Board Proceedings.No. 17.

3. From 01.05.1999, engagement of contract labourers were stopped in all the Thermal Power Stations and contract labourers who were working as on that date were directed to be engaged as daily wagers and the process of identification was completed. It appears that hundreds of workers were identified and absorbed in the Ennore Thermal Power Station and some were absorbed in the Distribution Circle with retrospective effect from 01.05.1999. The petitioner's Coworkmen and juniors were absorbed with effect from 01.05.1999.

4. The 3rd respondent vide proceedings dated 17.04.2002 informed the petitioner that in view of the fact that a criminal case was pending at the time of selection 10/99, the request of the petitioner for absorption as regular helper in terms of B.P.(FB) No.17 (sectt. Branch) dated 28.04.1999 cannot be considered.

5. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner challenged the proceedings dated 17.04.2002 in W.P.No.22249 of 2002, wherein, this Court was pleased to issue a direction to the first respondent / The Chairman, Electricity Board to consider the representation of the petitioner. Pursuant thereto the petitioner was absorbed w.e.f 28.09.2002. The petitioner accepted the above order of absorption which is effective from 28.09.2002 without any demur or protest. The petitioner also gave an undertaking that he would not claim any retrospective benefit. The petitioner admittedly gave an undertaking that he is wiiling to give up the seniority and that his name can be placed in the lowest category in Ennore Thermal Power Station.

6. It is now submitted by the petitioner that the denial of analogous appointment is arbitrary and legally incorrect in support thereof and reliance is sought to be placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar and other Vs. Arbind Jee 2021 reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 821. It is further submitted that the benefit of notional promotion ought to be conferred on the petitioner inasmuch as the petitioner is acquitted in the criminal case and thus, the petitioner would be entitled to be absorbed