Part-time or temporary employees appointed to permanent posts in Tamil Nadu Basic Service are entitled to regularisation upon completing 10 years of service, irrespective of appointment nomenclature.

ORDER :

P.T. Asha, J.

The above writ petition has been filed seeking a mandamus to the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioner in the post of Night Watchman on completion of 10 years of service by taking into account his initial appointment on 28.06.1984.

2. The petitioner would contend as follows :

(a) He was originally appointed as Masalji vide proceedings of the 5^th respondent dated 28.06.1984 on a consolidated pay of Rs.60/- per month. After putting 8 years of service, on 01.03.1992, he was promoted as Night Watchman, in which post he has been serving to date.

(b) While so, the respondents had initiated the process of regularisation of the services of the petitioner and individuals similarly like petitioner, who had been in service for very long period in time.

(c)The Government also issued G.O.Ms.No.22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 28.02.2006 prescribing that the individuals who had been appointed on a consolidated pay or daily wages and had completed 10 years of service are entitled for regularisation.

(d)Accordingly, the 5th respondent had made recommendations to the 4th and 5th respondents vide his proceedings dated 14.12.2006, to regularise the services of list of persons. The said list contained the names of one Chinnasamy and Sivappa who were also appointed in the post of Masalchi like that of the petitioner, including the petitioner herein and few others.

(e)On 09.09.2008, the first respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.144 dated 09.09.2008, in which it had decided to regularise the services of 114 employees out of 171, who had completed 10 years of service in Panchayat Union on consolidated pay, daily wages etc., however, the name of the petitioner did not feature therein.

(f) Thereafter, the 2nd respondent issued a circular dated 29.06.2010 to the 3rd respondent to provide additional particulars of the petitioner who was featured in Sl.No.5 of List No.1. Necessary details were submitted by the 3^rd respondent to the 2^nd respondent, who in turn had forwarded the details to the first respondent.

(g)Despite such efforts, no steps have been taken to regularise the services of the petitioner. Hence, he filed W.P.No.19664 of 2018 before this Court. This writ petition was taken up for hearing along with similar cases in W.P.Nos.19663, 19665 to 19669 of 2018, and had disposed of the writ petitions on 01.08.2018, with a direction to the first respondent to consider the representations of the petitioners therein, (including P.Chinnan, the petitioner herein) in line with G.O.Ms.No.22/P & AR Department. Dated 28.02.2006 and the recommendations of the second respondent, within a period of six weeks. However, the respondents have not complied with the directions of this Court in W.P.Nos.19663 to 19669 of 2018.

(h)Similarly placed Mr.M.Sivappa also approached this Court in W.P.No.23823 of 2023 to regularise his services and the same was ultimately referred to a Larger Bench of this Court. By order dated 26.02.2024, the Larger Bench had answered the reference in favour of the petitioner therein. Ultimately, it directed the Registry to place the above writ petition in W.P.No.23823 of 2023 before the learned Single Judge as per the roster for disposal. The learned Single Judge by his order dated 19.07.2024, had directed the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment with all service benefits within a period of four weeks.

Therefore, in the light of the above directions, the petitioner who is also similarly placed, is before this Court, seeking