SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 49914

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
P.T. Asha, J
G. Magesh – Appellant
Versus
Principal Secretary To Government – Respondent
WP No. 18792 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: G. Bala
For the Respondents: V. Sivalingam, R.A. Gopinath

State authorities are bound to consider regularization requests of service employees in parity with similarly situated individuals whose rights have been confirmed by prior binding Division Bench judgments and Supreme Court orders.

Headnote:The case involves a challenge under Art. 226 of the Constitution by employees seeking regularization of service. The petitioners, employed as Over Head Tank Operators, requested their services be regularized after three years of service, citing earlier Government Orders and a Division Bench judgment. The court noted the issue was already covered by judicial precedent and directed the relevant authority to consider the petitioners' representation in light of the cited judgment. The core issue is whether the petitioners, being similarly placed as employees in established precedents, are entitled to automatic regularization. The ratio decidendi rests on the principle of parity and compliance with settled judicial mandates regarding regularization upon completion of a specific tenure, as established in prior binding decisions. The writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the authorities to pass appropriate orders within two months.

Table of Content
1. basis for claiming regularization based on previous government orders and court precedents. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. court directive to authorities to follow established precedents regarding regularization of service. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8)

PRAYER: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to extend the benefits of G.O (2D) No. 64 Municipal Administration and Water Supplies (MC 3 ) Department dated 08.08.2019 and G.O (2D) No 68 Municipal Administration and Water supplies (MC 3 ) Department dated 27.08.2019 and in the light of the G.O (D) No 609 Municipal Administration and Water supplies (MC 3 ) Department dated 17.10.2025 and in the light of the Division bench Judgment in W.A. no 1615 of 2018 dated 23.11.2023 which is confirmed by the honble Supreme court on 27.09.2024 in SLP (C) No 22954 of 2024 by regularizing the services of the petitioners on completion of 3 years of service form date of their original appointment with all consequential service and monetary benefits, within a time frame as deem fit and proper by this Court.

For Petitioner(s): Mr. G.Bala

For Respondent(s): Mr. V. Sivalingam

Government Advocate for R1 and R2

Mr. R.A.Gopinath

Standing Counsel for R3

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed seeking the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to extend the benefits of G.O (2D) No. 64 Municipal Administration and Water Supplies (MC 3) Department dated 08.08.2019 and G.O (2D) No 68 Municipal Administration and Water supplies (MC 3 ) Department dated 27.08.2019 and in the light of the G.O (D) No 609 Municipal Administration and Water supplies (MC 3) Department dated 17.10.2025 and in the light of the Division bench Judgment in W.A. No 1615 of 2018 dated 23.11.2023 which is confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme court on 27.09.2024 in SLP (C) No 22954 of 2024 by regularizing the services of the petitioners on completion of 3 years of service form date of their original appointment with all consequential service and monetary benefits, within a time frame.

2. The case of the petitioners is that they were appointed as Over Head Tank Operators in Thenambakkam, Special Panchayat, Kancheepuram Municipality. They contend that similarly placed employees were granted regularization on completion of three years of service pursuant to Government Orders dated 08.08.2019 and 27.08.2019.

3. The petitioners further rely on the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench dated 23.12.2023, which confirmed that similarly situated employees are entitled to regularization from the date of completion of three years from their original appointment.

4. Despite being similarly placed, the petitioners have not been granted regularization. They therefore, seek regularization of service on par with other similarly situated employees and have approached this Court for appropriate relief.

5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent.

6. The issue involved in the present Writ Petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of the Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai and others vs. Principal Secretary to Government and others [W.A.No.1615 of 2018 dated 23.11.2023], which was confirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP(C).No.22954 of 2024, vide order dated 27.09.2024.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the 2nd respondent/ Directorate of Municipal Administration, to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 24.01.2026 and pass appropriate orders, in the light of the judgment of Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No 1615 of 2018 dated 23.11.2023, within a period of two (2) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, this Writ Petition s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top