K.S.Devendiran v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.10.2016

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.P.Nos.16679 to 16686 of 2015 and M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2015 in W.P.Nos.16679 & 16681 of 2015 and W.P.Nos.479 to 484 of 2016 K.S.Devendiran ... Petitioner in W.P.16679 of 2015 Mrs.G. Salomi No.10/37 Vijayaraghavan Street Nellorepet Gudiyatham 632 602 [ PETITIONER IN WP 16680/2015 ] R.Mariappan 108 Vinayagar Koil Street Krishnapuram Rajapalayam Virudhunagar District [ PETITIONER IN WP 16681/2015 ] D.Selvaraj No.181 Beach Road Kattumavadi Post Manamelkudi Taluk Pudukottai District [ PETITIONER IN WP 16682/2015 ] M.Chelliah Karambakudi Therkku Chetty Theru Karambakudi Post and Taluk Pudukottai District [ PETITIONER IN WP 16683/2015 ] S.Ramamurthy No.32/26 Srinivasa Nagar North Extension Thiruvanaikovil Trichy 625 005 [ PETITIONER IN WP 16684/2015 ] A.Nagarajan Arjunapuram Village and Post Santhavasal Via Polur Taluk Thiruvannamalai District [ PETITIONER IN WP 16685/2015 ] P.M.Chandrasekaran 119 Arunachalam Road West R.S. Puram Coimbatore [ PETITIONER IN WP 16686/2015 ]

F.Anwar Basha 39-A West Link Colony Krishnagiri 635 001 [ PETITIONER IN WP 479/2016] Dr.M.Arokiasamy Parayapatti Puthur Po. G.K.Road Pappireddypatti Dharmapuri [ PETITIONER IN WP 480/2016] K.Srinivasan Melamaganam Kovilur Po.

[ PETITIONER IN WP 481/2016] R.Sivalingam A.Vellalampatti Agraharam Post Harur Taluk Dharmapuri District PETITIONER IN WP 482/2016] Mrs.R.Kasthuri W/o.Late.A.Rajendiran D.No.3036 Renuka Devi Street Housing Board Mela Anuppadi Madurai-9 [ PETITIONER IN WP 483/2016] Mrs.E.Chandira Door No.3/110 Mariamman Koil Street Gengavalli Taluk Salem District[ PETITIONER IN WP 484/2016] Vs., 1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

2.The Director, Local Fund Audit Department, Kuralagam, Chennai-600 108.

3.The Assistant Director, Local Fund Audit Department, Kuralagam, Chennai-600 108.

4.The Collector, Villupuram Collectorate, Villupuram.

5.The Commissioner, Sankarapuram Panchayat Union, Villupuram District.

... Respondents in w.p.16679 of2016 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai 9 2 The Assistant Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108 3 The Collector Vellore Collectorate Vellore 4 The Commissioner Gudiyatham Panchayat Union Vellore District [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 16680/2015] 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai 9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108 3 The Assistant Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108 4 The Collector Virudhunagar Collectorate Virudhunagar 5 The Commissioner Sivakasi Panchayat Union Virudhunagar District [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 16681/2015] 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai 9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108

3 The Collector Pudukottai Collectorate Pudukottai 4 The Commissioner Manamelkudi Panchayat Union Manamelkudi Taluk Pudukottai [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 16682/2015] 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai 9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108 3 The Collector Thanjavur District Thanjavur 4 The Commissioner Thiruvonam Panchayat Union Thanjavur District [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 16683/2015] 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai 9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108 3 The Collector Pudukottai Collectorate Pudukottai District 4 The Commissioner Avudaiyarkoil Panchayat Union Avudaiyarkoil Pudukottai District [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 16684/2015] 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai 9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108

3 The Collector Thiruvannamalai District Thiruvannamalai 4 The Commissioner Polur Panchayat Union Thiruvannamalai District [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 16685/2015] 1 The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai 9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 108 3 The Collector Pudukottai Collectorate Pudukottai 4 The Commissioner Avudaiyarkoil Panchayat Union Avudaiyarkoil Pudukottai District [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 16686/2015] 1 The State of Tamilnadu rep. by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai-9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 600 108 3 The Collector Dharmapuri Collectorate Dharmapuri 4 The Commissioner Harur Panchayat Union Dharmapuri [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 479/2016] 1 The State of Tamilnadu rep. by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai-9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 600 108

3 The Collector Dharmapuri Collectorate Dharmapuri 4 The Commissioner Morappur Panchayat Union Dharmapuri [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 480/2016] 1 The State of Tamilnadu rep. by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai-9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 600 108 3 The Collector Thanjavur Collectorate Thanjavur 4 The Commissioner Ammapettai Panchayat Union Thanjavur [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 481/2016] 1 The State of Tamilnadu rep. by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai-9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 600 108 3 The Collector Dharmapuri Collectorate Dharmapuri 4 The Commissioner Karimangalam Panchayat Union Dharmapuri [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 482/2016] 1 The State of Tamilnadu rep.

by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St.

1 The State of Tamilnadu rep. by its Secretary to Government Rural Development Department Fort St. George Chennai-9 2 The Director Local Fund Audit Department Kuralagam Chennai 600 108 3 The Collector Salem Collectorate Salem 4 The Commissioner Gengavalli Panchayat Union Salem District [ RESPONDENTS IN WP 484/2016] Prayer: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 3rd respondent comprised in order dated 19.09.2014 in Na.Ka.No.29999/Vu.O.O.Sa.(1)/2014, and to quash the same as Arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional and consequently, to direct the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department, dated 25.08.

2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 01.10.1984. (w.P.No.16679/2015) Prayer in WP 16680/2015 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus calling for records of the 3rd respondent comprised in order dt 25.2.2015 in Mu. Mu. No. 31571/Vu. O. O. Sa. (1)/2014 quash the same as arbitrary illegal unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms. No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dt 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.

1984 Prayer in WP 16681/2015 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus calling for records of the 3rd respondent comprised in order dt 4.9.2014 in Mu. Mu. No. 26036/Vu. O. O. Sa. (3)/2014 quash the same as arbitrary illegal unconstitutional and consequently direct the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms. No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dt 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.

Prayer in WP 16682/2015 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms. No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dt 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.1984 Prayer in WP 16683/2015 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms. No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dt 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.

1984 Prayer in WP 16684/2015 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms. No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dt 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.1984 Prayer in WP 16685/2015 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms. No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dt 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.1984.

Prayer in WP 16686/2015 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms. No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dt 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.1984 Prayer in WP 479/2016 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dated 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.1984

Prayer in WP 480/2016 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dated 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.1984 Prayer in WP 481/2016 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dated 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.

1984 Prayer in WP 482/2016 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dated 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 1.10.1984 Prayer in WP 483/2016 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dated 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioners husband prior to 1.10.

1984 Prayer in WP 484/2016 Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith calculate and pay the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department dated 25.8.2009 in the time bound manner by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioners husband prior to 1.10.1984 For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramesh For Respondents: Mr.S.

COMMON ORDER These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners, challenging the impugned orders passed by the Assistant Director, Local Fund Audit Department, rejecting the request of the petitioners to given revised pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department, dated 25.08.2009, by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioner prior to 01.10.1984.

2.Since the issue involved in these writ petitions are one and the same, they are disposed of by way of this common order.

3.

2.The brief facts, which are necessary to dispose of these writ petitions are follows_ 2-1.The petitioners were appointed as B-II Class Siddha Doctor on various dates and after serving at various places, they retired from service on different dates. Thereafter, pension has been sanctioned to the petitioners and they has been receiving the same.

2-2.Insofar as the petitioners' services are concerned, a question arose as to whether the Rural Medical Practitioners are full time Government Servants entitled to the benefits on par with other Government servants. The issue in this regard has its origin from the year 1978, wherein a Doctor Shanmugam, B-II Class Medical Practitioner, had filed a writ petition in W.P.No.1578 of 1978 before this Court and the learned Single Judge of this Court allowed the said writ petition, directing the Government to provide time scale of pay and the same has been implemented by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.1068, Health and Family Welfare Department, dated 28.06.1983.

Subsequently, one another Rural Medical Practitioner namely J.Krishnamurthy filed a writ petition in W.P.No.863 of 1989 for directing the Government to provide him time scale of pay. The said writ petition was also allowed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 08.03.1995. As against the said orders, the Government had preferred appeals in W.A.Nos.922 & 1036 of 1995 & 95 of 1996. The Division Bench of this Court modified the orders of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.863 of 1989 dated 08.03.1995 and held that the Rural Medical Practitioners were entitled to time scale of pay from 01.10.1984. Based on the said order, a batch of writ petitions came to be filed in W.P.Nos.2007 to 2011 of 1997.

The same were disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court in the year 1997, wherein the Division Bench of this Court directed the Chief Secretary to grant relief to the persons who are placed similarly to that of the petitioner in W.P.No.922 of 1995 dated 01.02.1996. Subsequently, Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.16, Rural Development Department, dated 29.01.1998, granting time scale of pay to Rural Medical practitioners with effect from 01.10.1984.

2-3.While so, the State Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.250, Rural Development Department, dated 14.09.2000, in and by which the State Government observed that the services of Rural Medical Practitioners are part time service and that they are not entitled to the benefits on par with the Government servants. The said GO was challenged before the State Administrative Tribunal by way of Original Applications and subsequently, it was transferred to this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.30003 of 2004 etc. The Division Bench of this Court by order dated 19.04.2006 quashed the said GO insofar as it classified the services of the Rural Medical Practitioners as part time Government servants and denied them service benefits.

The Division Bench of this Court categorically held that Rural Medical Practitioners like that of the petitioners are full time Government Servants and that they are entitled to pension and other service benefits on par with the Government employees with time scale of pay fixed with effect from 01.10.1984. The said order has become final. 2-4.In the interregnum, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.408 (Finance) Pension Department, dated 25.08.2009, wherein Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules was amended. As per the said G.O., the persons who are in Government service under the non-provincial service, consolidated pay, honorarium and daily wages were not entitled to be taken into account their services rendered prior to regularization for the purpose of pension.

By virtue of the said amendment, the State Government observed 50% of the services of the persons who are employees after 01.01.1961 on consolidated pay, honorarium and daily wages and who were absorbed in regular service prior to 01.04.2003 would be entitled to take into account 50% of their services prior to regularization for the purpose of pension. Therefore, 50% of the services of Rural Medical Practitioners rendered prior to 01.10.1984 were entitled to be added to their services for the purpose of calculating pension.

2-5.Some of the Rural Medical Practitioners sent representations to the 1st respondent seeking the benefit granted pursuant to the amendment to Rule 11 of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. The respondents herein rejected the said claim stating that the services of Rural Medical Practitioners are part time services; therefore, they are not entitled to benefit granted on account of amendment of Rule 11 of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. The same was challenged in the batch of writ petitions before this Court in W.P.Nos.53 to 56 of 2011. A learned single Judge, of this Court by order dated 12.11.2011 allowed the writ petitions and directed the respondents to grant the benefits. The 1st respondent preferred an appeal in W.A.No.1618 of 2012 as against the order dated 12.11.2011. The Division Bench of this Court dismissed the same on 08.10.2012. Thereafter, the said Rural Medical Practitioners were granted benefits. Subsequently, another batch of writ petitions were filed in W.P.Nos.32378 to 32383 of 2013 and 8215 to 8218 of 2014 and the same were also

allowed by this Court on 08.12.2014. The learned Single Judge of this Court observed that each of the persons who are similarly placed should not be made to come to the Court for the purpose of the relief when the principal of law has been settled finally by this Court.

2-6.Citing the above decisions of this Court, the petitioners herein made representations to the respondents. In respect of some of the petitioners herein, the respondents herein have once again rejected the request of the petitioners observing that the services of the petitioner are part time one and therefore they are not entitled to the concessions granted under G.O.Ms.No.409, Pension Finance Department. As regards, other petitioners, the representations were not considered by the respondents. Hence, the present writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners. 3.When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has relied upon the decision of this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.53 to 56 of 2011, dated 12.11.2011 (V.Subramaniam and others Vs.

The Director, Local Fund Audit Department, Kuralagam, Chennai and others) and submitted that in the said writ petitions, in identical issue, this Court has allowed the prayer of the petitioners therein, who are similarly placed persons as that of the petitioners herein; that the issue involved in these writ petitions has already been settled; that following the above said decision, these writ petitions could also be allowed.

4.Heard the learned Additional Government Pleader also and perused the materials available on record. 5.As contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the issue involved in these writ petitions has been dealt with by this Court in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.53 to 56 of 2011, dated 12.11.2011 (V.Subramaniam and others Vs. The Director, Local Fund Audit Department, Kuralagam, Chennai and others). The relevant portion in the said decision reads as follows_ "5........... When the Honourable Division Bench of this Court has given a clear and specific finding on facts that the Rural Medical Practitioners are to be treated as employees on regular service working in the rural dispensaries, the earlier services rendered by them cannot be refused to be taken into account for the purpose of computing their pension, in accordance with the Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.408, Finance (Pension) Department, dated 25.08.2009. When the petitions were directed to be treated on par with the other regular employees, they are

entitled for all the benefits and they cannot be treated differently. The ration laid down by the Honourable Division Bench of this Court on the earlier two occasions has become final as against the respondents and in fact, the same was accepted and implemented by the respondents. Therefore, when the nature of work is the same and the petitioners were treated as regular employees with a specific finding that they have been doing the work of regular employees right from the very date of appointment, they cannot be differentiated on the sole ground that prior to the regularization they were working in a part time capacity and therefore they are not entitled for the benefits as against the erstwhile daily rated employees who were subsequently regularised.

Such a classification being an artificial classification, is impermissible under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

6.When a party gets a right under a judgment, the said accrued right cannot be denied based upon an artificial classification. There is absolutely no basis for treating the petitioners differently than that of the other employees inspite of the ratio laid down by the Honourable Division Bench of this Court on the earlier occasions. When the petitioners have been given all other benefits treating them on part with the regular employees, for the purpose of computing the pension alone they cannot be treated differently, even after the judgment of the Honourable Division Bench of this Court, directing the Government to give them the benefits on par with the other employees. It is to be seen that the Government Orders give the benefit to the erstwhile consolidated and daily rated employees who are not in a better position than the petitioners.

7.In other words, this Court on the earlier occasions found that since a classification cannot be sustained in the eye of law. The denial of computation of pension to the petitioners in accordance with the Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.408, Finance (Pension) Department, dated 25.08.2009, is nothing but an attempt to interfere with the orders passed by this Court. What has to be seen is the ratio laid down by the Court of law and on a mere

technical ground the petitioners cannot be non-suited.

The very object of the Government Order passed in G.O.Ms.No.408, Finance (Pension) Department, dated 25.08.2009 is to given benefits to the employees, who were working earlier on consolidated as well as daily rated wages.

Therefore, the petitioners without any basis cannot be denied the said benefits as such a benefit will have to be extended to the petitioners as well. "

The above said decision of the learned Single Judge was also confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in writ appeal in W.A.No.1618 of 2012 dated 08.10.2012.

The decision cited supra is squarely applicable to the present facts of the case also. Hence, following the same, I am of the opinion that similar orders could be passed in this writ petition also. 6.Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed and the impugned orders are quashed. The respondents are directed to calculate and the revised pension and arrears of pension based on G.O.Ms.No.408 Finance (Pension) Department, dated 25.08.2009, by taking into consideration the 50% of the services rendered by the petitioners prior to 01.10.1984 and pay the same to the petitioners, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

No costs.

Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS VII ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar ssv To, 1.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu Rural Development Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.

2.The Director, Local Fund Audit Department, Kuralagam, Chennai-600 108.

3.The Assistant Director, Local Fund Audit Department, Kuralagam, Chennai-600 108.

4.The Collector, Villupuram Collectorate, Villupuram.

5.The Commissioner, Sankarapuram Panchayat Union, Villupuram District.

6 The Collector Vellore Collectorate Vellore 7 The Commissioner Gudiyatham Panchayat Union Vellore District 8 The Collector Virudhunagar Collectorate Virudhunagar 9 The Commissioner Sivakasi Panchayat Union Virudhunagar District 10 The Collector Pudukottai Collectorate Pudukottai 11 The Commissioner Manamelkudi Panchayat Union Manamelkudi Taluk Pudukottai 12 The Collector Thanjavur District Thanjavur 13 The Commissioner Thiruvonam Panchayat Union Thanjavur District 14 The Commissioner Avudaiyarkoil Panchayat Union Avudaiyarkoil Pudukottai District 15 The Collector Thiruvannamalai District Thiruvannamalai 16 The Commissioner Polur Panchayat Union Thiruvannamalai District 17 The Commissioner Avudaiyarkoil Panchayat Union Avudaiyarkoil Pudukottai District 18 The Collector Dharmapuri Collectorate Dharmapuri 19 The Commissioner Harur Panchayat Union Dharmapuri

20 The Commissioner Morappur Panchayat Union Dharmapuri 21 The Commissioner Ammapettai Panchayat Union Thanjavur 22 The Commissioner Karimangalam Panchayat Union Dharmapuri 23 The Collector Sivaganga Collectorate Sivaganga 24 The Commissioner Manamadurai Panchayat Union Salem District 25 The Collector Salem Collectorate Salem 26 The Commissioner Gengavalli Panchayat Union Salem District 14 ccs to M/s. S. Ramesh, Advocate Sr. 56860 to 56873 W.P.Nos.16679 to 16686 of 2015 and M.P.Nos.1 & 1 of 2015 in W.P.Nos.16679 & 16681 of 2015 and W.P.Nos.479 to 484 of 2016 RSK (CO) kk 24/11