M.P.Prabu Arul Wales v. The Secretary To Government
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 17.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR W.P.No.255 of 2022 and W.M.P.No.282 of 2022 M.P.Prabu Arul Wales, Assistant, Office of the District Manager, TAHDCO, Thiruvallur District, Tiruvallur- 602001.
... Petitioners
Versus
1.The Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Managing Director, TAHDCO, Head Office, Chennai- 18.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issuance of a Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent's proceedings vide letter. No.9184/Adhi Dravidar -1/2020-3 Dated 23.01.2021 and the 2nd respondent's letter No.A.2/6119/2019 dated 29.10.2021 quash the same as legally not valid and direct the first and second respondents to revise my service as Junior Assistant with effect from my date of initial appointment (22.07.2007) and further direct them to provide subsequent promotions by taking into account of my service rendered in the cadre of record clerk with effect from my service 22.01.2007 and in the cadre of Junior Assistant with effect from 19.07.2006 along with back wages and other monetary benefits within a time frame as may be stipulated by this Court.
Page No.1 of 8
For Petitioner :
Mr.R.Govindasamy For R1 :
Mr.P.Baladhandayutham, Special Government Pleader For R2 :
Mr.C.A.Ashok Kumar *****
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records of the 1st respondent's proceedings in letter No.9184/ADW1/2020-3, dated 23.01.2021 and the 2nd respondent's proceedings in letter No.A2/6119/2019, dated 29.10.2021 quash the same as legally not valid and direct the respondents to revise the petitioner's service as Junior Assistant with effect from his date of initial appointment (22.07.2007) and further, direct them to provide subsequent promotions by taking into account of his service rendered in the cadre of Record Clerk with effect from his service 22.01.2007 and in the cadre of Junior Assistant with effect from 19.07.2006 along with back wages and other monetary benefits within a time frame as may be stipulated by this Court.
2.The case of the Writ Petitioner is that his father was working as Assistant in the office of the 2nd respondent and died on 11.09.2005. On compassionate ground, the petitioner was appointed as Record Clerk on 10.01.2007, vide proceedings No.R2/1869/2006. Though he was eligible Page No.2 of 8
for the post of Junior Assistant, he was given appointment for the post of Record Clerk at the relevant point of time and thereafter, he has been promoted to the post of Junior Assistant on 27.08.2015. Subsequently, on 05.02.2021, the petitioner got promotion to the post of Assistant and continuously working in the 2nd respondent's office. The contention of the petitioner that on the date of joining on 22.01.2007, the post of Junior Assistant was vacant in the office of the 2nd respondent. Whereas the 2nd respondent has appointed the petitioner to the post of Record Clerk. Therefore, the petitioner sent a representation to the respondents, which was rejected to regularize him as Junior Assistant. 3.A counter has been filed by the 2nd respondent.
It is the contention of the 2nd respondent that the petitioner does not have requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant as per the Revised Service Rules of TAHDCO approved in the 138th Board Meeting held on 24.09.2001, whereby the qualification prescribed for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant in TAHDCO is "Must possess a Bachelor Degree". Based on the Chief Secretary to Government, Labour and Employment Department letter Ms.No.126/Q-1/2006, dated 16.09.2006, it Page No.
was decided to fill up the following vacancies on compassionate ground in the 169th Board Meeting held on 01.12.2006. Accordingly, the following members were appointed as Junior Assistants in the year 2006: S.No.
Name Educational Qualification P.Balasubramanian B.A (Economics) L.Loganatha B.A (History) K.Venkateshwari B.A (Economics) The following members were appointed as Record Clerk on compassionate ground:
S.No.
Name Educational Qualification M.Kalaivani 12th passed G.Narayanan 10th passed S.Prasanna 10th passed K.Balaji 12th passed In 2007, the following members were appointed as Record Clerks: S.No.
Name Educational Qualification M.P.Prabhu Arul Wales 12th failed N.Rajinikanth 10th passed M.Ezhilvendan 10th passed S.Agalya 12th passed P.Kuppuraj 10th passed V.Balaji 12th passed Page No.4 of 8
S.No.
Name Educational Qualification P.Saravanakumar Diploma in Civil Engineering A.Senthilkumar 10th passed M.Suresh Kumar 10th passed 4.Therefore, the petitioner has not entitled for change of employment on retrospective regularization and he cannot question the same.
5.Heard Mr.R.Govindasamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.P.Baladhandayutham, learned Special Government Pleader for the 1st respondent and Mr.C.A.Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent and perused the materials.
6.It is seen that the very compassionate appointment is a concession granted by the Government to alleviate the family who are distressed in view of the sudden demise of the earning member. When the petitioner was already appointed as Record Clerk in the year 2007 on compassionate ground, now merely on the basis of the representation he cannot seek regularization retrospectively in the post meant for Junior Assistant. Further, in the Revised Service Rules of TAHDCO, the Page No.5 of 8
qualification prescribed to the post of Junior Assistant in TAHDCO is "Must Possess a Bachelor Degree", which has been approved in the 138th Board Meeting held on 24.09.2001. In any event on the very compassionate ground, the petitioner has been appointed as Record Clerk in the year 2007 itself. Hence, he is not entitled to the relief claimed by him. 7.It is also seen that the petitioner has given representation after lapse of 14 years on 28.02.2020 and no explanation has been given for such delay.
8.In such view of the matter, there is an unexplained delay and latches also disabling the petitioner to seek any relief before this Court. Hence, I do not find any merit consideration in this Writ Petition to interfere with the impugned orders of the respondents. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.
17.07.2023 vv2 Index : Yes/No Page No.6 of 8
Internet: Yes/No Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order To 1.The Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Managing Director, TAHDCO, Head Office, Chennai- 18.
Page No.7 of 8
N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.
vv2 17.07.2023 Page No.8 of 8