IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.07.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL W.A.No.1036 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.10369 of 2023

1. R.Rajalingam

2. M.Jaiganesh 3. G.Gnansekar

4. N.Subramanian

5. M.Karunathi 6. V.Rabi Ditto

7. A.Karthikeyan

8. V.Venkatesan ... Appellants -Vs-

1. The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Engineer in Chief (General), Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai.

3. The Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Building Construction and Maintenance, Chepauk, Chennai.

4. The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Building Construction and Maintenance Circle, Thanjavur District. ... Respondents PRAYER : Appeal under Clause XV of Letters Patent against the order dated

02.09.2022 made in W.P.No.33877 of 2014.

For Appellants : Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan For Respondents : Mr.V.Ravi Special Government Pleader

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)

This intra Court appeal has been directed against the order dated

02.09.2022 made in W.P.No.33877 of 2014.

2. The appellants were the writ petitioners whose case before the writ Court was that, they were initially engaged as NMRs by the respondent Dept., i.e., Non-Muster Roll and they have been continuously serving for ten years, therefore, they are entitled to get the benefit of regularization after completion of ten years of service as per G.O.(Ms)No.22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 28.02.2006 which was a policy decision of the Government, under which, the Government of Tamil Nadu announced the policy that, those NMRs on temporary and consolidated pay, who have completed ten years of service as on 01.01.2006 would be entitled to seek for regularization or confirmation on such completion, as a regular employee. 3. This plea given by the appellants / petitioners had been turned out by the proceedings issued by the respondent Department dated 17.06.2014. Challenging the same, they joined together and filed the said writ petition seeking for a writ of certiorarified mandamus.

4. The learned Judge, who heard the writ petition was of the view that, though initially G.O.(Ms)No.22 dated 28.02.2006 was issued declaring the policy of the Government that, those temporary employees like NMRs who have completed ten years of service as on 01.01.2006 can be regularized as per G.O.(Ms)No.22, subsequently the Government has come forward to issue G.O.(Ms)No.74, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 27.06.2013, wherein, in paragraph No.6, certain conditions have been imposed and one of such condition of G.O.(Ms)No.74 was that, all those conditions which have been imposed under G.O.(Ms)No.74 shall be deemed to have come into force retrospectively with effect from 01.01.2006, the date on which, the cut-off date has been given under G.O.(Ms)No.22.

5. Therefore, the benefit that has been accrued on these kind of temporary employees or NMRs by virtue of G.O.(Ms)No.22 has been completely taken away by virtue of G.O.(Ms)No.74.

6. In the said circumstances, G.O.(Ms)No.74 was put under challenge before the writ Court in a batch of writ petitions which were allowed by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22.09.2017, where, the writ Court has set aside the onerous condition that has been made in G.O.(Ms)No.74, especially paragraph No.6 of G.O.(Ms)No.74.

7. As against which, when intra-Court appeals have been filed, that have also been confirmed.

8. Therefore, the legal position would be that, whatever the benefits that have been accrued on the temporary employees / NMRs like the present appellants under G.O.(Ms)No.22 to get regularization on completion of their ten years service on 01.01.2006 again stood restored, thereby, they are entitled to get the benefits.

9. In the similar circumstances, already a Division Bench of this Court, where one of us (RSKJ) is a party, had dealt with similar issue