Entitlement to regular appointment and notional promotion based on irregularities in the appointment process and subsequent temporary appointment. Modification of order regarding arrears of salaries and allowances based on the principle of 'no work, no pay'.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 15.11.2021 passed by the learned Judge in W.P.Nos.30113 of 2019, 15409 of 2020, 15416 of 2020, 30124 of 2019, 30118 of 2019, 30106 of 2019, 15412 of 2020 and 30121 of 2019.)

Mahadevan, J.

1. Assailing the common order dated 15.11.2021 passed by the learned Judge in WP.No.30106 of 2019, etc. cases, these writ appeals have been filed by the State.

2. Brief facts which are necessitated for disposal of these appeals are that the Government of Tamil Nadu had issued G.O.Ms.No.305 Health and Family Welfare (N1) Department, dated 22.09.2009, by which appointments to the post of Health Inspector Grade-II were permitted to be made to the persons, who acquired qualifications outside Tamil Nadu and also ordering relaxation under Rule 5(b)(iii) of the Public Health Subordinate Service Adhoc Rules. An annexure has also been enclosed along with the G.O. specifying the names of 55 candidates who were to be given relaxation and appointment. The respondents’ names were found in the annexure of 55 candidates. The Government order further directed the second appellant to take steps to appoint the said 55 candidates after verifying their certificates. Even though the respondents’ names were found in the said annexure, instead of appointing them, the authorities have called for a list from Employment Exchange, fixed cut off marks and interviewed the candidates. On the other hand, by order dated 13.01.2011, the second appellant left out 9 persons whose names were found in the annexure and appointed some other persons whose names were not found in the annexure or in the list furnished by the Employment Exchange. After filing of the writ petition viz., WP.No.7376 of 2011 by these respondents, this Court directed the appellants to consider their representations and pass appropriate orders. Since the said order has not been complied with, the respondents herein filed a Contempt Petition in Cont.P.No.1422 of 2011, in which, counter affidavit has been filed by the second appellant giving reasons for non-appointment. Recording the same, the contempt petition was closed leaving it open to the respondents to challenge the non-appointment. Subsequently, the second appellant issued orders to some of these respondents stating that they did not acquire the necessary marks and hence, they were not considered for appointment. Aggrieved by the same, the respondents preferred writ petitions, viz., WP.No.16488 of 2012 etc., in which, this Court took serious objection to the Government’s action in overlooking the respondents herein while giving irregular appointments to others. Stating so, the said writ petitions were allowed on 26.03.2015 by quashing the orders passed by the authorities. Pursuant to the same, the second appellant issued orders stating that the Government had permitted to appoint the respondents as Multi Purpose Health Workers (M) and accordingly, they were appointed to the said post in the scale of Rs.5200-20200 +2400 on 27.07.2015 under Rule 10(a)(1) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules, which Rule envisages only temporary appointments to meet administrative exigencies.

3. With the above background, the respondents herein filed the instant writ petitions to direct the appellants herein to appoint them on a regular basis as Health Inspectors Grade II [now known as Multipurpose Health Workers (M)] with effect from 13.01.2011 in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.305 dated 22.09.2009 read with the judgment dated 26.03.2015 passed by this Court in W.P.No.16488 of 2012 with all consequential benefits of seniority, increments, arrears of salary and promotion with effect from the same date when other such appointees in 2011 were promoted pursuant to the panel dated 24.10.2019.

4. The contention of the respondents before the writ Court was that because of denial of appointment as per G.O.Ms.No.305 dated 22.09.2009 and the subsequent temporary appointment,