W.A(MD)No.124 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 16.02.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PARESH UPADHYAY

and

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

W.A(MD)No.124 of 2022

and

C.M.P(MD)No.1231 of 2022

The President,

D.D.568, V.Ammapatti Primary Agricultural

Cooperative Credit Society,

V.Ammapatti,

Achanampatty Post,

Vedachanthur Taluk,

Dindigul District.

.. Appellant/

2^nd Respondent

Vs.

1.B.Seetha Lakshmi

.. 1^st Respondent /

Petitioner

2.The Assistant Commissioner of Labour,

Authority under Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishment

(Conferment of Permanent Status to Workman) Act, 1981,

Dindigul.

.. 2^nd Respondent/

1^st Respondent

PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent

against the order dated 01.07.2021 passed in W.P(MD)No.10854 of 2021

by the learned Single Judge.

Prayer in WP(MD). 10854/ 2021 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a writ of

Mandamus or any other order or direction in the nature of writ

directing the 2nd respondent to implement the order passed by the

1st respondent in Pa.Nee.sa.Va.No.01/2021 (Na.Ka.AA.No.538/2020)

dt.31.05.2021 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to

regularize the service as clerk/jewel appraiser with effect from

02.01.2020 with all other consequential and attendant monetary

benefits and pass such further or other orders as this Hon`ble Court

may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and thus

render justice.

1/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.A(MD)No.124 of 2022

For Appellant

: Mr.S.Balamurugan

For Respondent No.1

: Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi

For Respondent No.2

: Mr.J.Ashok,

Additional Government Pleader.

J U D G M E N T

[Delivered by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.]

Challenge in this appeal is made to the order dated

01.07.2021 recorded on W.P(MD)No.10854 of 2021. This appeal is by

the second respondent in the writ petition. The matter pertains to

regularisation of service of the writ petitioner. The learned

Single Judge, on the basis of the material on record has allowed the

claim of the writ petitioner and given direction to implement the

order passed by the first respondent i.e., Assistant Commissioner of

Labour, Authority under Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishment

(Conferment of Permanent Status to Workman) Act, 1981, Dindigul.

2. Learned advocate for the appellant and learned

Additional Government Pleader for the second respondent have

submitted that, the order passed by learned Single Judge is

unsustainable and would encourage backdoor entries, therefore this

appeal be entertained.

3. Learned advocate for the workman has submitted that,

the claim of the petitioner was rightly considered by the competent

authority under the labour machinery established by the State and on

examination thereof, when the petitioner was found to be entitled to

certain benefits, the respondents ought to have given effect thereto

and they erred by not implementing the order passed by the Assistant

Commissioner of Labour and therefore the direction given by learned

Single Judge to implement the order of the said authority can not be

said to be erroneous. It is submitted that this appeal be

dismissed.

4. Having heard learned advocates for the respective

parties and having considered the material on record this Court

finds that, the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge,

confirming the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Labour,

in our view, can not be said to be erroneous in any manner and

therefore no interference is required in the impugned order. This

appeal therefore needs to be dismissed.

2/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.A(MD)No.124 of 2022

5.

For the above reasons, this appeal is dismissed. No

costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Pet