IMPORTANT POINT
Regularization of employment requires adherence to constitutional provisions and recruitment rules, specifically against sanctioned posts, to prevent infringement of eligible candidates' rights.

JUDGMENT :

S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 07.12.2017 passed in W.P.No. 30374 of 2003.

1. The intra-Court appeal on hand has been instituted challenging the writ order dated 07.12.2017 passed in W.P. No. 30374 of 2003.

2. The respondents herein are the writ petitioners filed a writ of certitiorarified mandamus to quash the proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent dated 21.03.2003 and the consequential order of the 4th respondent dated 17.10.2003 and to direct the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners in the sanctioned post in the time scale of pay with effect from 01.06.1998 with all monetary benefits.

3. The order of appointment issued to the respondents by the Devicode Panchayat President dated 01.12.1997 would reveal that the respondents were appointed as Water Supply Assistant on daily-wage basis. They were appointed by the Panchayat President, which is not in dispute. The case of the respondents were that they continued as daily-wage employees for long years and subsequently, the Panchayat President regularised their services. The appellants have not approved the regularization and passed the impugned order, which resulted in filing of the writ petition by the respondents.

4. Mr.R.Neelakandan, learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the appellants would submit that the initial appointment of the respondents were made not against the sanctioned posts. The initial appointments were not made in accordance with the Panchayat Service Rules in force. Thus, the appointment of the respondents were irregular and not in consonance with the Recruitment Rules in force. In the absence of any sanctioned posts, President Panchayat cannot regularise the services of the daily-wage employees. He would further contend that it is a part time employment. But, erroneously designated as full-time daily wage employees by the Panchayat President. Thus, the proceedings of the Panchayat President was disapproved by the competent Authorities under the provisions of the Panchayat Act.

5. Pertinently, actions were initiated against the Panchayat President in the present case, since illegal appointments were made.

6. The learned Additional Advocate General would submit that the writ court has not considered these aspects. The writ court proceeded mainly on the basis that the respondents were appointed as daily wage employees for full-time employment. Therefore, they are entitled to be regularised in the sanctioned post. When the initial appointment of the respondents were not in accordance with the Recruitment Rules in force and in the absence of any sanctioned posts, the writ court ought not to have granted the relief of regularization. Thus, the State preferred the present writ appeal.

7. The learned Additional Advocate General would rely on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court passed in W.A. No. 1483 of 2013 dated 20.02.2018, wherein, the facts are identical. The Division Bench held as follows:

“4. Before the writ court, the appellants 1 and 2 filed separate affidavits contending that there was no sanctioned post of Water Supply Assistant. According to the appellants, the first respondent was engaged on daily wages as a Water Supply Assistant, without there being any recruitment rule. It was contended that as there was no post of Water Supply Assistant sanctioned for Maruthancode village Panchayat, the first respondent is not entitled for regularisation.

5. The learned Single Judge, taking into account the contention taken by the first respondent, issued a mandamus directing the appellants to regularise his services.

6. There is nothing on record to show that the first respondent was appointed against a sanctioned post. Even according to the first respondent, his father donated land to the local body, subject to the condition that he should be given appointment. The then President of Maruthancode Village Panchayat appears to have appo