JUDGMENT

Common Judgment

D. Krishnakumar, J.,

1. The appellant has filed these writ appeals challenging the impugned common order dated 07.09.2017 made in W.P.Nos.4803, 12775, 24508, 26370 and 26371 of 2012, in and by which the learned Single Judge, has directed the appellant/first respondent in the writ petitions to apply the provisions of G.O.Ms.No.22, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms Dated 27.02.2009 to the respondents/writ petitioners and regularize their services from the date of their initial appointment by sanctioning necessary posts in respect of various categories in which the writ petitioners/respondents concerned are working and grant all other attendant monetary benefits.

2. Facts leading to the filing of these writ appeals are as follows. For the sake of brevity, the array of parties in W.A.No.69 of 2019 is adopted:

2.1. The writ petitioners are all casual employees working in the seventh respondent commission which is functioning under the appellant Department. The seventh respondent Commission was constituted in the year 2004 as per the orders of the Government of India. It is a statutory body being controlled by the appellant Department viz., Women and Child Welfare Department. The entire funds for the Commission is funded by the Government of Puducherry.

2.2. The writ petitioners came to be appointed on various dates during the year 2004 on casual basis and they have been allowed to continue in their work uninterruptedly without any break. They were originally paid daily wages ranging from Rs.277/- to Rs.376/- depending on their employment in various categories. Since the writ petitioners have been continuously working from the date of their respective original appointment, they have been recommended by the appellant for regularizing their services on par with regular employees employed by the Government in similar categories.

2.3. According to the writ petitioners, originally the Government of Puducherry issued G.O.Ms.No.92, in the year 1998 providing for regularization of daily rated employees, who had rendered a minimum of 240 days service in a year. The said Government Order has been replaced by G.O.Ms.No.22, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms dated 27.02.2009, which provides for comprehensive guidelines for employees like the writ petitioners in a phased manner. The said Government Order was issued solely for the purpose of regularising casual employees working in the Department of Government of Puducherry and their Subordinate Offices.

2.4. According to the writ petitioners/respondents, the employees working in the seventh respondent Commission under the appellant Department are also covered under the Scheme and therefore, they are also entitled to be conferred with the benefit of the provisions of the Scheme. After the said Government Order coming into force in the year 2009, several departments have initiated action for regularizing the services of casual employees by implementing the Government Order. However, inspite of the fact that the writ petitioners / respondents are similarly placed, their claims were not considered by the appellant department and therefore, they filed the aforesaid writ petitions.

2.5. The appellant/first respondent in the writ petitions have filed a common counter affidavit in all the writ petitions stating that the seventh respondent Commission has no power or competency to engage anybody and it is only the Directorate of Women and Child Development can engage persons in the event of need after getting the concurrence of the Finance Department and the orders of the Lieutenant Governor and the claim of the writ petitioners that they have been appointed by the Pondicherry Women''s Commission after getting from the Government of Pondicherry is absolutely false and at no point of time, the Government of Pondicherry gave any approval to make any engagement of casual labou