BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.09.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY W.P.(MD).No.2677 of 2016 R.Thiruganana Sambantham ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Annasalai, NPKRR Maligai, Chennai – 600 002.

2.The Chief Engineer Personnel, Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution Corporation Limited, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

3.The Superintending Engineer, Trichy Electricity Distribution Circle (Metro), Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Mannarpuram, Trichy – 20. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in pursuant to the impugned order passed by the second respondent in Letter No.049202/200/G.19/G.192/2014-2 dated 11.11.2014 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services rendered by the petitioner from 01.04.1982 to 18.11.2005 and the same shall be taken into account for counting the service for pensionary benefits and to pay pension and consequential arrears within a stipulated time may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : M.Saravana Kumar For Respondents : M/s.P.Malini, for M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the impugned order dated

11.11.2014 and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner from 01.04.1982 to 18.11.2005 and the same service shall be counted for pensionary benefits.

2. The brief facts as stated in the affidavit are that the petitioner was engaged as contract labour in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board from 01.04.1980. Thereafter, the Union raised Industrial Dispute through the Labour Court under Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishment (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981 and obtained an order granting permanent status in Case No.8240/1999 dated 21.12.2000. The Board filed Writ Petition and Writ Appeal against the order of the Labour Court and the same was ended up in dismissal. Finally, the petitioner was posted as Mazdoor in permanent status only on 18.11.2005. The contention of the petitioner is that from 01.04.1980 till the permanency was granted to the petitioner, the petitioner was in employment without any break in the Electricity Board. The petitioner claims that he ought not to have filed the permanent status case as when the Electricity Board itself identified about 18,000 contract labourers as per Mr. Justice Khalid Commission. The petitioner's name was also included in the list and the petitioner is one among 18,000 contract labours that was absorbed in the Board service. Without taking into account these facts, the petitioner was regularized only from 18.11.2005 in an arbitrary manner. The petitioner has completed 480 days that is on 01.04.1982 itself. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 11.02.2013. Since the representation was not considered, the petitioner filed W.P.(MD).No.7040 of 2014 with a prayer to direct the respondents to regularize the service and the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 23.04.2014 directed the respondents to consider the representation. The respondents without considering the representation had passed the impugned order dated 11.11.2014. The contention of the petitioner is that the impugned order is against the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.311 of 2004 dated 07.11.2008. Since in an identical issue, the respondents by proceedings dated 24.02.2010 implement the order of the Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, Tirunelveli dated 02.01.2001, as per the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench dated 07.11.2008 in W.A.No.311 of 2004. The respondents ought to have regularized the petitioner's service atleast from 2001 onwards. The petitioner is aggrieved over the impu