Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 44024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Anand Venkatesh, J
V.Sivakumar – Appellant
Versus
Dr.D.Karthikeyan, I.A.S. – Respondent
Contempt Petition No. 1670 of 2025|W.P.No.22280 of 2024
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms.Karthikaa Ashok
For the Respondents: Mr.C.Selvaraj, Mr.D.B.R.Prabhu
Court held that regularization of daily wage workers was processed correctly, and no contempt was committed regarding timely actions.
Headnote:(A) Contempt of Court - Power of the Court - The petitioners claim regularization of services from an earlier date based on Government Orders and allege contempt regarding non-compliance with a previous order; the Court reviews affidavits and discussions related to Government Orders concerning employment regularization. (Para 1-15)
(B) The Government Order and Employment - The petitioners were appointed on daily wage posts and claimed lack of timely action in regularization; the Court finds there's no contempt as due process was followed. (Paras 4-14)
Facts of the case:
The petition pertains to a group of daily wage employees seeking contempt penalties against governmental respondents for non-implementation of a High Court order regarding their regularization.
Findings of Court:
The Court determines that no contempt was established as the government followed the necessary steps and processes regarding the employment regularization.
Issues: The principal issues involved interpretations of Government Orders concerning regularization of daily wage workers.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court left the issues of employment regularization open for future adjudication but found that no contempt was committed in not fulfilling the prior order.
Result: Contempt petition closed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contempt petition arises from unresolved employment regularization issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
ORDER
The contempt petition has been filed to punish the Respondents for contempt of the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.22280 of 2024 dated
08.08.2024.
2. An affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent. This Court has carefully gone through the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. The relevant portions in the affidavit are extracted hereunder, `4. It is respectfully submitted that the petitioners were appointed by way of resolution No.228/2001 issued by the Special Officer. The petitioners were appointed duly on daily wage posts and they were allowed to continue to perform their duties and responsibilities for about 99 days and thereafter by following the due procedures regular breaks were given, in order to continue a daily wages employee. The Government issued G.O.No.125 dated 27.05.1999, taking a decision to regularize the service of the daily wages employed and make them permanent employees. Accordingly, the Corporation was directed to prepare the list, containing the particulars of individual employees. The respondent prepared the seniority list and sent to the Government. The Government have also issued G.O.Ms.No.20, granting regularization in respect of the persons employed in the department of Malaria, Road, Water drainage Department with effect from
23.02.2006.
5. It is respectfully submitted that based on the order, the respondent Chennai Corporation has issued an order in proceedings dated 23.02.2006. Accordingly, 912 daily wage employees were regularized in sanctioned post and brought under the regular establishment. The petitioners were recruited on daily wages for the work under Chennai Corporation. The petitioners were recruited for the need of work under Chennai Corporation, Hence there was no Government Order between 1993 to 26.05.1999 to regularize the period for permanent work.
6. It is respectfully submitted that the G.O.(Ms.)No. 125, Municipal Administration & Water Supplies (MCIII) Dept, dated 27.05.1999 called for the particulars of persons, who were working before 04.05.1999. This Government Order at no point of time mentions about the regularization of services of the petitioner from 27.05.1999. Hence, there is no need to regularize their services front 27.05.1999 and hence the petition is devoid of merits.
7. It is respectfully submitted that the Government directed the Corporation to enlist the eligible persons who were working continuously before 04.05.1999 and further directed this Corporation to submit the said list of particulars of the eligible persons to the Government on or before 31-10-1999. Immediately after the approval of the above Government Order this Respondent had started acting on the enlistment of the eligible persons and to that effect the resolution was also passed by the Council vide its resolution No.228/2001 dated 04.04.2001 but due to the general elections held in the year 2001, the implementation of G.O.Ms. No. 125 was delayed which is neither wilful nor wanton and even then it is the time frame fixed by the Government to forward the enlisted particulars on or before
31.10.1999.
8. It is respectfully submitted that as per G.O.
No.125 Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department on 27.05.1999, preparation of a list of 912 daily wage workers in Chennai Corporation was carried out. In the meantime, the G.O.Ms.No.212. PERSONNEL & ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (P) DEPARTMENT dated 29.11.2001 has been issued as follows;
"The Government has decided to effect economy in expenditure and accordingly direct that filling up vacant posts shall be completely banned except certain categories of posts such as Teachers, Doctors and Police Constabulary which may be identified and declared as essential posts Proposals for filling vacant posts considered e
