M.Rathinasamy, v. The Chairman,
In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated : 01.03.2018 Coram THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SATRUGHANA PUJAHARI W.P.Nos.27022 to 27024 of 2009 W.P.No.27022 of 2009 1.M.Rathinasamy
...Petitioner
Salem Electricity Distribution Circle Udayappatty, Salem - 14.
... Respondents W.P.No.27023 of 2009 1.K.Nagaraj 2.N.Venkatesh 3.P.Kaliyappan 4.R.Ramajayam 5.P.Ganesan 6.M.Venkatachalam 7.P.Sadaiyappan 8.M.Govindasamy 9.M.Lakshmanan 10.S.Kesavan 11.V.Murugan 12.T.Thirupathi 13.T.Veerakumar 14.K.Mariappan 15.D.Paramasivam 16.R.Palani 17.N.Mani 18.R.Anandan 19.N.Singaravelu 20.P.Murugan 21.D.Ganesan
22.A.Sankar 23.G.Manoharan 24.K.Vediyappan 25.K.Namboodhiripadu 26.Sathyamoorthy 27.K.Babu 28.K.Arul 29.M.Thirumal 30.V.Sivasankaran 31.M.Raman 32.M.Gunasekaran 33.C.Kowran 34.M.Thangavel 35.M.Sankar 36.M.Jayaraman 37.G.Arumugam 38.K.Ponnusamy 39.R.Vediyappan 40.R.Ramakrishnan 41.A.Vadivel 42.M.Sekar 43.A.Raja 44.K.Mariappan 45.P.Dharmalingam 46.M.Ambedkar 47.S.Sivamuthu 48.P.Govindaraj 49.M.Ganesan 50.K.Gopal 51.K.Vellaichamy 52.K.Sekar 53.P.Ponnurangan 54.K.Selvam 55.A.Ramesh 56.M.Krishnan 57.M.Vishnu 58.K.Subramani 59.M.Mariappan 60.J.Robert Ponniah 61.P.Thangaraj 62.P.Mayakrishnan ...
Petitioners
Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution Circle Dharmapuri ... Respondents W.P.No.27024 of 2009 1.K.Ganesan 2.P.Perumal 3.M.Rajendran 4.S.Elango 5.K.Murugan 6.M.Balasubramanian 7.C.Pandidurai 8.P.Raja 9.C.Mariyaraj 10.M.Mariyadoss 11.S.Aruputham 12.S.Kannan 13.S.Sankar 14.M.Rajagopal 15.D.Bharathidasan 16.K.Anthony Michael 17.D.Sekaraj 18.G.Anthonraj 19.A.Amalraj 20.N.Selvakumar 21.P.Balasubramanian 22.S.Eunath 23.P.Manimaran 24.M.Anthony 25.P.Anburaja 26.M.Bakiyasamy 27.C.Mariyappan 28.S.Johnraj 29.S.Anthony Raj 31.A.Lakshmi Narayanan 32.A.Gunasekaran 32.S.Kaliyappan 33.P.Karuthapandi 34.V.Isakki 35.V.Lakshmanan 36.S.Selvaraj 37.A.Gnanamani 38.V.Jayaseelan 39.C.K.Kumar 40.C.Mariyappan 41.V.Subbaiah 42.P.Somasundaram 43.S.Chinnadurai
44.S.Jayakumar 45.V.Karuppasamy 46.S.Krishnan 47.V.Sudalai 48.E.Selladurai 49.M.Gopal 50.L.Ezhumalaiyan 51.D.Gangaiya 52.M.Subbaiah 53.V.Madasamy 54.P.Koil Pillai 55.D.Samuel ...
Petitioners Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution Circle Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli ... Respondents Common Prayer : Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioners' representation dated 02.12.2009 engage him as Contractual Labourers as usual, consequently make him permanent of their posts on the basis of their experience and skill as per memo No.012267/G.58/Q.582/2008-1 dated 20.02.2008 on the file of the 1st respondent.
For Petitioners :
Mr.S.S.Saravana Kumar For Respondents :
Mr.P.R.Dhilip Kumar (in Wp.Nos.
27022 & 27024/09 For Respondents in Wp.NO.27023/09 :
Mr.Fakkir Mohideen
C O M M O N O R D E R Identical facts and law being involved in all these three writ petitions, all are heard together and disposed of by this common order.
2.It appears that the petitioners who are allegedly working under the respondent No.3 as contract labourers, have sought for regularisation of their services as some of their collegues, who are similarly situated with them, have already been regularised on the strength of an order of the Inspector of Labourer, but, their cases have not been considered, even though they have made representation to the respondent No.3 in this regard. Hence, they have filed these writ petitions, seeking writ of mandamus, directing the respondent No.3 to consider the representation of the petitioners and regularise their services. 4.However, during the course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners only grievance is, no order has been passed on their representation, submitted to the respondent No.3, hence he may be directed to dispose of the same taking note of the grievance of the petitioner.
5.The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection for the same.
6.Considering the aforesaid facts and submissions made, these writ petitions stand disposed of, with a direction to the respondent No.3 that if any representation made by the petitioners for their regularisation is pending with him, he shall consider and take a decision on such representation, in accordance with law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7.It is needless to state that while considering such representation the petitioners' grievances that the similarly placed persons have been regularized but their cases have been ignored, shall be addressed in accordance with law. Sd/- Asst.Registrar (CS IV ) /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar To
Salem Electricity Distribution Circle Udayappatty, Salem - 14.
4.The Superintending Engineer Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution Circle Dharmapuri.
5.The Superintending Engineer Tirunelveli Electricity Distribution Circle Maharaja Nagar, Tirunelveli + 2 cc to M/s.P.R.Dhilipkumar Advocate,SR.16151,16152 + 1 cc to M/s.Fakkir Mohideen Advocate,SR.16154 +1cc to M/s.Saravana Kumar, Advocate sr.no.15844 W.P.Nos.27022 to 27024 of 2009 sai(co) nr 27/03/2018