← Library
Madras High CourtWP/18397/2021disposed of

P.Krishna v. Union Of India

2023-12-12Honourable Ms Justice R.N.Manjula12 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 12.12.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA W.P. Nos.18397, 25550 & 24115 of 2021 W.P.No.18397/2021

1. P.Krishna

2. P.Krishnananda Swamy @ P.K.Swamy

3. D.CH.Mavullu

4. T.Veerabhadra Rao @ T.V.Bhadra Rao

5. G.Veera Ragavulu @ G.V.Raghavulu

6. N.Veerababu

7. N.Ramanna

8. P.A.K.Varma

9. V.Narasimha Murthy @ V.N.Murthy

10. B.Sankarudu

11. P.Prasad

12. S.K.Basha

13. M.Arjuna Rao

14. P.Satyanarayana

15. K.Dhanapathi Rao ... Petitioners /vs/

1. The Union of India Rep. by Govt. of Puducherry, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry - 605 001.

2. The Director, Local Administration Department, Pondicherry - 1

3. The Commissioner, Yanam Municipality, Yanam - 533 464.

... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to implement the scheme of Temporary Status vide O.M.No.51016/2/30-Estt(C), dated 10.09.1993 of Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi and communicated vide G.O.Ms.No.20, dated 05.04.1995 by the DP & AR (Personnel wing), Puducherry with effect from the respective date of eligibility of the petitioners and consequently direct the respondents to pay the arrears of difference in wages by virtue of implementation of the temporary status from the respective dates of eligibility of the petitioners based on the petitioner's representation dated 10.02.2021. W.P.No.25550 of 2021

1. N.Mourougan

2. S.Babu

3. V.Balamurugan

4. R.Archunan

5. A.Anandhan

6. D.Padmavady

7. S.Govindu

8.V.Padmavathy

9. V.Dhanasu

10. K.Manibalan

11. P.Sampathy

12. A.Sundaramoorthy

13. P.Muthuvel

14. R.Santhanam

15. G.Perumal

16. M.Srinivasan

17. K.Rajavel

18. L.Ramesh

19. V.Mahalingam

20. V.Ayyapan

21. P.Ezhumalai

22. K.Murthy

23. K.Murugayan

24. P.Sivanesan

25. V.Rangasamy

26. R.Perumal

27. S.Durairaj

28. R.Srinivasan

29. M.Perumal

30. A.Latchumanasamy

31. S.Vijayan

32. D.Palani

33. S.Rajasekaran

34. D.Irrisamma

...Petitioners

/vs./

1. The Union of India Rep. by Govt. of Puducherry, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry - 605 001.

2. The Director, Local Administration Department, Pondicherry - 1.

3. The Commissioner, Villianur Commune Panchayat, Villianur Puducherry - 605 005.

... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to implement the scheme of Temporary Status vide O.M.No.51016/2/30-Estt(C), dated 10.09.1993 of Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi and communicated vide G.O.Ms.No.20, dated 05.04.1995 by the DP & AR (Personnel wing), Puducherry with effect from the respective date of eligibility of the petitioners and consequently direct the respondents to pay the arrears of difference in wages by virtue of implementation of the temporary status from the respective dates of eligibility of the petitioners based on the petitioners' representations dated 23.11.2020. W.P.No.24115 of 2021

1. R.Kannan

2. R.Ramesh

3. G.Punniakodi

4. V.Tamiliselvam

5. S.Manivannan

6. A.Sangothari

7. M.Hariharan

8. D.Iyyanar

9. T.Muruganantham

10. K.Pushpanatham

11. J.Arumugam

12. V.Deivasigamani

13. N.Palani

14. M.Pandurangan 15.M.Kumaraguru

16. S.Veera Velmurugan

17. R.Sundaram

18. R.Kala

19. S.Perumal

20. P.Masilamani

21. A.Azhagappan

22. K.Muthukumaran

23. K.Murugan

24. M.Shankar

25. V.Thulukkanam

...Petitioners

/vs./

1. The Union of India Rep. by Govt. of Puducherry, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry - 605 001.

2. The Director, Local Administration Department, Pondicherry - 1

3. The Commissioner, Oulgaret Municipality, Jawar Nagar, Puducherry - 605 005.

... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to implement the scheme of Temporary Status vide O.M.No.51016/2/30-Estt(C), dated

10.09.1993 of Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi and communicated vide G.O.Ms.No.20, dated 05.04.1995 by the DP & AR (Personnel wing), Puducherry with effect from the respective date of eligibility of the petitioners and consequently direct the respondents to pay the arrears of difference in wages by virtue of implementation of the temporary status from the respective dates of eligibility of the petitioners based on the petitioners' representations dated 09.11.2020. For Petitioner ... Mr.D.Sreenivasan (in all W.P's.) For Respondents ... Mr.Ramasamy Meyappan (in all W.P's.) Additional Govt. Pleader (Puducherry) COMMON ORDER These Writ Petitions are filed to direct the respondents to implement the scheme of Temporary Status vide O.M.No.

51016/2/30-Estt(C), dated 10.09.1993 of Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi and communicated vide G.O.Ms.No.20, dated 05.04.

temporary status from the respective dates of eligibility of the petitioners based on the petitioners' representations.

2. The petitioners are said to have been engaged as Daily Wagers on various dates by the third respondent municipality. The petitioners' temporary status will relate back to the respective date of their eligibility. But, due to the delay in causing the order for conferring temporary status upon the petitioners, the petitioners cannot be made to loose the pay benefit attached to the temporary status.

2.1. Attention of the Court was attracted to the Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of Government of India, 1993, which speaks about the temporary status. The relevant paragraph of the scheme is extracted hereunder : " 5. Temporary status would entitled the casual labourers to the following benefits:

i) Wages at daily rates with reference to the minimum of the pay scale for a corresponding regular Group 'D' official inlcuding DA, HRA and CCA. ii) Benefits of increments at the same rate as applicable to a Group "D" employee would be taken into account for calculating pre-rata wages for

every one year of service subject to performance of duty for at least 240 days (206 days in administrative offices observing 5 days week) in the year from the date of conferment of temporary status.

iii) Leave entitlement will be on a pre-rata basis at the rate of one day for every 10 days of work, casual or any other kind of leave, except maternity leave, will not be admissible. They will also be allowed to carry forward the Leave at their credited their regularization. They will not be entitled to the benefits of encashment of leave on termination of services for any reason or on their quitting service.

iv) Maternity Leave to lady casual labourer as admissible to regular Group 'D' employees will be allowed.

v) 50% of the service rendered under Temporary status would be counter for the purpose of retirement benefits after their regularization. vi) After rendering three years continuous service after conferment of temporary status, the casual labourers would be treated on par with temporary Group 'D' employees for the purpose of contribution to the General Provident Fund, and would also further be eligible for the grant of Festival Advance/ Flood Advance of the same conditions as are applicable to temporary Group 'D' employees, provided they furnish two surieties from permanent Government servants of their Departments. vii) Until they are regularized, they would be entitled to Productivity Linked Bonus / Ad-hoc bonus only at the rate as applicable to casual labourers."

2.3 It is claimed by the petitioner that they have completed 240 days of service as early as in the year 1997-1999. However they have been given

with temporary status only in the year 2002.

3. Mr.Ramasamy Meyappan, the learned counsel for the respondents, did not quarrel with the nature of the scheme and its terms. However, he submitted that each of the petitioners' case will be different depending upon the type of employment and the process of their employment and hence the petitioners representation cannot only be considered in the light of the scheme but only after examining all other details in this regard.

4. In that case it is open to the petitioners to make their representation with the relevant details called for by the respondents and on getting the same, the respondents shall consider and pass orders in terms of the scheme especially in compliance of Paragraph No. 5 of the "Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of Government of India, 1993", within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. While considering the representation of the petitioner, it is desirable that the respondents shall also take into consideration of the earlier order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in similarly

placed person in the case of Union of India Vs. Nagarajan & others dated 16.01.2015 in S.L.P.(C) No.17349/2007.

5. With the above directions, these writ petitions are disposed. No costs.

12.12.2023 Index: Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order bkn

To:

1. The Chief Secretariat, Govt. of Puducherry, Puducherry - 605 001.

2. The Director, Local Administration Department, Pondicherry - 1.

3. The Commissioner, Yanam Municipality, Yanam - 533 464.

4. The Commissioner, Villianur Commune Panchayat, Villianur Puducherry - 605 005.

5.The Commissioner, Oulgaret Municipality, Jawar Nagar, Puducherry - 605 005.

R.N.MANJULA ,J.

bkn W.P. Nos.18397, 25550 & 24115 of 2021 12.12.2023