BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 26.11.2025 CORAM :

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and WMP.(MD)No.13927 of 2021 The Management of The Bharathi Co-operative Spinning Mills Ltd., Vilathikulam Road, Ettayapuram-628 902, Tuticorin District. ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour (Enforcement), Authority under Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981, Tuticorin.

2.K.Michaeal Irudhaya Anand

3.K.Rengasudhakar

4.M.Madhavarajan ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records of the first respondent herein in his proceedings in Na.Ka.E.1122/2020 dated 09.08.2021 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.K.Hemakarthikeyan For R1 : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar, Special Government Pleader.

For R2 to R4 : Mr.D.Srinivasa Raghavan.

ORDER

The petitioner, co-operative spinning mill, has filed this writ petition as against the order of the first respondent authority under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981, [hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’] dated 09.08.2021.

2.The respondents 2 to 4 have approached the first respondent that they have completed 480 days in a period of two years in the petitioner-mill and that they are entitled for conferment as provided under Section 3 of the Act. The case of the second respondent is that he is working as cashier in the petitioner-mill from 11.08.2014 and he has qualified with B.Com degree. The case of the third respondent is that he is working as clerk in the petitioner-mill from 05.07.2017 and he is possessing M.A. degree. The fourth respondent claims that he is working as Store Keeper from 01.07.2016 and he is possessing M.Com degree. Considering the materials placed before the first respondent, the first respondent by his order dated 09.08.2021 has granted the conferment of permanent status to the respondents 2 to 4 and directed the petitioner-mill to provide eligible benefits to them. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner-mill has preferred this writ petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-mill submits that the petitioner-mill is a Government undertaking establishment under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act and also covered by the regulations made therein. Employment, if any in the petitioner-mill can be made only through employment exchange in the manner prescribed. However, the respondents 2 to 4, who were working as NMRs, have filed the above application before the first respondent and the first respondent, without ascertaining the procedures for appointment in the petitioner-mill, has erroneously allowed the said application directing the petitioner-mill to confer the permanent status.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner-mill, by referring to the judgment of this Court in L.Justine and another Vs. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Chennai and others reported in 2002 (4) CTC 385, submits that this Court has set aside the similar order passed by the authority under the Act by referring to the mode of recruitment provided under the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act. The above said judgment was also confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in A.Umarani Vs. Registrar of Cooperative Societies and Others reported in 2004 (7) SCC 112 holding that persons, who came by backdoor should go through that door. Therefore, as per the ratio laid down by this Court and by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the respondents 2 to 4 are not entitled for any conferment, since their service have not been engaged in the sanctioned post and also without following the procedures as contemplated.

5.The learned counsel has also relied upon the judgment of this Court in WP.(MD)Nos.20590 to 20594 of 2023 dated 14.10.2025 wherein this Court has rejected the claim of conferment of permanent status claimed by the workers as against the very same pet