← Library
Madras High CourtWP/30657/2015dismissed

Adri Dravidar/Pazhakudiyinar v. The Union Of India

2016-04-04Honourable Mr Justice T. S. Sivagnanam3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 04.04.2016

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM WRIT PETITION NO.30657 OF 2015 AND M.P.NO.1 OF 2015 Adi Dravidar/Pazhakudiyinar Munnetra Sangam, rep. by Treasurer V.Guna

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.

The Union of India, Government of Puducherry, rep. by its Secretary, Adi Dravida Welfare, The Managing Director, Puducherry Adi Dravidar Development Corporation Ltd., No.30, 2nd Cross, Pon Nagar, Reddiyar Palayam, Puducherry-605 013.

...Respondents

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to discontinue the engagement of all 43 persons, engaged as daily wages/NMRs/Casual Laborers on voucher paid basis after 2009, by adhering to G.O.Ms.No.22, dated 27.02.2009 Department of Perssonnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Puducherry.

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Rajan For Respondents : Ms.D.Reena Iswarya Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The petitioner is an Association, and they sought for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to discontinue the engagement of 43 persons, who were engaged as daily wages, Noon Meal Organizers, Casual Laborers on voucher paid basis after 2009, by adhering to G.O.Ms.No.22, dated 27.02.2009, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Government of Puducherry.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3.

Counter affidavit has been filed by respondents, wherein, at the very outset, it has been pointed out that the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit of this Writ Petition are absolutely vague, and it is only their apprehension. It is further pointed out that the petitioner has made very vague and bald allegations and the names of 43 persons, have note even been disclosed. In any event, the respondents in para No.6 of the counter affidavit have stated that the scheme framed by the Government has been strictly adhered to, and there is no violation.

4.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that that, he will be satisfied if the stand taken by respondents in para No.6 of the counter affidavit is recorded. However, while doing so, it has to be pointed out that the petitioner/Association has come up before this Court on roving exercise, without even furnishing any particulars to this Court. Hence, the relief sought for by the petitioner cannot be granted based on such vague averments. Thus, while rejecting the prayer sought for in this Writ Petition, the stand taken by respondents in their counter affidavit is placed on record. 5.

In the result, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.

The Secretary to Government of Puducherry, The Union of India, Adi Dravida Welfare,

The Managing Director, Puducherry Adi Dravidar Development Corporation Ltd., No.30, 2nd Cross, Pon Nagar, Reddiyar Palayam, +1cc to Mr.R.Sreedhar, Advocate, S.R.No.21198 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.21294 Writ Petition No.30657 of 2015 bvr(CO) srg(22/04/2016)