W.P.(MD).No.21473 of 2018

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 22.03.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY

W.P.(MD).No.21473 of 2018

and

W.M.P.(MD).No.19364 of 2018

N.Karuppasamy

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The District Collector,

Thoothukudi District,

Thoothukudi.

2.The Commissioner,

Department of Social Defence,

No.300, Purasaivakkam Highway,

Kellis, Chennai – 600 010.

3.The District Employment Officer,

District Employment Exchange,

Thoothukudi District.

4.The Superintendent,

Government Children Home for Boys,

Thattaparai – 628 304,

Thoothukudi District.

... Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified

Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the fourth

respondent relating to impugned order of rejection passed by him in

his proceedings No.0293/A1/2017, dated 21.08.2017 and the

consequential rejection of appeal passed by the second respondent

vide his impugned proceedings in No.2292/A3/2018, dated 21.03.2018

and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently

directing the respondents 2 to 4 to absorb the petitioner in the

post of 'Hair Dresser' or 'Sanitary Worker' or 'Gardener' in

Juvenile Home, Thattaparai or in any of the equivalent post in the

fourth respondent District by considering his 18 years of service

rendered in the fourth respondent home within the time limit that

may be stipulated by this Court.

1/4

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

W.P.(MD).No.21473 of 2018

For Petitioner

: Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu

For Respondents

: Mr.S.Kameswaran,

Government Advocate (Civil Side).

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the impugned

order dated 21.08.2017 and the consequential rejection order dated

21.03.2018 with a consequential prayer to absorb the petitioner in

the post of 'Hair Dresser' or 'Sanitary Worker' or 'Gardener' in

Juvenile Home, Thattaparai or in any of the equivalent post in the

fourth respondent District by considering his 18 years of service

rendered in the fourth respondent home.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is

hailing from socially and educationally backward community coming

under the class of Most Backward Category. The petitioner was

basically a Hair Dresser by profession and the petitioner was

engaged in the Hair Dressing for the children staying and studying

in the fourth respondent Government Children Home for Boys.

3. The contention of the petitioner is that he was serving

for more than ten years and he is entitled to regularization under

time scale of pay. The petitioner has registered his name in the

Employment Exchange on 09.01.2008 and Registration Number is

68/2008. The fourth respondent has issued an experience certificate

stating that the petitioner was working for more than nine years.

The petitioner submitted a representations on 19.02.2008, 15.02.2008

and 19.03.2008 to the first respondent and the third respondent to

absorb the petitioner in the sanctioned post for Hair Dresser or

Sweeper or both. The third respondent vide communication dated

29.01.2009 informed that there was no vacancy available for the

petitioner's qualification and whenever the vacancy arises the same

will be intimated to the petitioner, the respondents would consider

based on the educational qualification, age and seniority. Since

the respondents have not consider the petitioner's claim and the

petitioner has filed this Writ Petition relying on the judgment

rendered in the Secretary, State of Karnataka and others Vs. Umadevi

and others reported in 2006 4 SCC Page 1.

4. The fourth respondent has filed a counter affidavit

stating that the petitioner was engaged for Hair Dresser and he

would visit the home once in 45 days or 60 days. The petitioner is

not regularly engaged. There are