Employees engaged temporarily are entitled to regularization from their initial appointment date if they have served continuously and the government has implicitly acknowledged their roles.

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed for direction directing the Principal Secretary to Government, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai, to pass appropriate orders regularizing the services of the petitioners from the date of their initial appointment on contract basis vide G.O.Ms.No.85 , Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Per G) Department dated 04.07.2003 and read with G.O.Ms.No.698 , Revenue Department, dated 20.12.2005 and grant all other benefits to the petitioners by taking into consideration of the service rendered by them to the Government.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3. Similarly placed persons approached this Court for the very same direction in W.P.Nos.27900 of 2018, 11923 and 13033 of 2013. This Court, by an order dated 15.03.2023 allowed the writ petitions. Though writ appeal filed as against the order passed by this Court, no interim order has been obtained by the respondents.

4. This Court, in W.P.Nos.27900 of 2018, 11923 and 13033 of

2013 dated 15.03.2023 held as follows:-

“5. To appreciate the claim of the petitioners herein, the circumstances of their initial absorption may be relevant.

6. With effect from 02.07.2003, the Federation of the Employees of the various departments in the Government of Tamil Nadu joined an indefinite strike. The Government having failed to resolve the demands of these striking employees, took a policy decision to recruit temporary Junior Assistants to over come the contingencies arising out of the strike. Through G.O. (Ms) No.263, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 21.06.2004, 1000 temporary supernumerary posts in the Tamil Nadu Secretariat and 500 Junior Assistants in each Districts were created for appointment on contract basis. In this background, about 15,500 persons from the Employment Exchanges came to be engaged on contract basis. After the strike had ended and the regular employees had rejoined their duties, these contract employees continued in service for more than one year thereafter. Through G.O. (Ms) No.263, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 21.06.2004, their services were terminated. Since these employees had expressed their difficulties in finding an alternative employment, the then Hon'ble Chief Minister had issued a press statement on 23.06.2004, ordering for continuation of the services of the contract employees in the Government and accordingly their services were utilised in the vacancies in various departments. Consequently, the Government had, rightly in my view, decided to conduct a Special Competitive Examination in Group-IV Standard through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) for their permanent absorption. The decision of the Government, which came as a privilege, became momentary in view of the subsequent decision of the Government to regularise their services from the date of completion of the Special Competitive Examinations.

7. Being aggrieved by the decision of the Government in having declined to grant retrospective regularisation from the date of their initial appointments, the present Writ Petitions have been filed.

8. When a situation arose on a set of facts before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S. Sumnyan's case (supra), wherein a similar claim was made by the employees for regularisation from the date of initial appointment, even though their initial appointment was not in accordance with the prescribed procedure, it was held that the subsequent decision to regularise would relate back to the date of their initial appointment. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:-

“42. In the case at hand, however, the fact situation is totally different on account of the fact that the appointment letters issued to the appellants appointing them on temporary and ad hoc basis as Assistant Engineers in the Public Works Department specifically mentioned that the appellants will be governe