IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 20.09.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.No.4875 of 2016 &

W.M.P.No.4235 of 2016 P.Sundararaj ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Secretary, Public Works Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.

2. The Engineer-in-charge cum Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.

3. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Water Resources Organization, Trichy Region, Trichy. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for records relating to the first respondent's Letter No.25172/C2/2014-5 dated 15.06.2015, to quash the same and to consequently direct the respondents 1 to 3 to regularize the services of the petitioner as watchman with effect from 23.08.1987 with all service and consequential monetary benefits including pension and other pensionary benefits thereto from the said date and to extend all benefits thereto.

For Petitioner : Mr. L.Chandrakumar For Respondents : Mr. P.Ganesan, Government Advocate

O R D E R

The order of rejection rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for granting regularization of service and permanent absorption on completion of five years of service as per the G.O.Ms.No.52, Finance Department dated

14.01.1977 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2. The petitioner states that he was sponsored through the District Employment Exchange and accordingly selected and appointed on 23.08.1982 as daily wage night watchman by Assistant Executive Engineer. He continued as daily wage employee for several years and retired from service on 30.04.2016 on attaining the age of superannuation.

3. The learned counsel for petitioner made a submission that the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.52, Finance Department, dated 14.01.1977, granting the benefit of regularization and time scale of pay on completion of five years of daily wage service. However, the benefit of the said Government order was not extended to the writ petitioner during the relevant point of time. Proposals were sent by he respondents from the year

1978 onwards. Subsequently, several proposals were sent by the authorities to the Head of the Department and Government for the purpose of granting regularization and permanent absorption in favour of the writ petitioner. Despite the fact that several proposals were submitted by the authorities right from the year 1987, no action was taken for granting the benefit of regularization in accordance with the Government order issued in G.O.Ms.No.52, Finance Department dated 14.01.1977. Finally the Petitioner filed W.P.No.24197 of 2014 and this court passed an order on 08.09.2014 directing the respondents therein to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 12.04.2013 and dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. Pursuant to the directions, the order impugned dated 15.06.2015 has been passed rejecting the case of the writ petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was appointed as Watchman on contingency basis and therefore, initial appointment was irregular and hence, he is not eligible for regularization.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated that the petitioner has served more than 30 years as daily wage employee. The Government issued orders in the year 1977 to regularize the services of the daily wage employees on completion of five years. Now the petitioner is aged about 66 years and therefore, his services are to be regularized for the purpose of grant of pension under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978. It is contended that even before appointing the writ petitioner, Government order issued in G.O.Ms.No.52, Finance Department, dated 14.01.1977 was in existence and thus, the benefits are to be extended to the writ petitioner.

5. The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents objected the said contention by stating that the