The Management v. Five Men Committee

W.A.No.

of 202 and C.M.P.No.24574 of 2025 M.S.RAMESH, J.

and R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

At the instance of the learned counsel for the appellant herein, the Writ Appeal is listed today under the caption "For Being Spoken To". 2.Heard the learned counsel for the appellant. 3.In consideration of the above, paragraph No.5 of our earlier order passed in W.A.No.3037 of 2025 dated 03.11.2025 shall stand modified as follows:

"5.In view of the dismissal of the Writ Appeal, the appellant shall implement the award of the Writ Court passed in W.P.No.5009 of 2022 dated 30.01.2025, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed." 4.All other findings and observations made in our earlier order stand intact.

M.S.RAMESH, J.

and R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

kas 5.Registry is directed to incorporate the above modification and issue a fresh order copy to the parties.

[M.S.R., J] [R.S.V.,J] 24.11.2025 kas

W.A.No.

of 202 and C.M.P.No.24574 of 2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 03.11.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL and CMP.No.24574 of 2025

... Appellant Vs.

... Respondents PRAYER: Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order passed in WP No.5009 of 2022 dated 30.01.2025. For Appellant : MrT.Chandrasekaran For Respondent : Mr.S.T.Varadharajulu

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of this Court was delivered by M.S.RAMESH.J) This Writ Appeal has been filed to set aside the order passed in W.P.No.5009 of 2022 dated 30.01.2025.

2. In the order passed in W.P.No.5009 of 2022, which is impugned

before us, the Transport Corporation appears to have raised only one objection, namely, that for the purpose of conferment of permanent status, the concerned workman has to approach the Authority under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981 alone.

3. The learned Single Judge, held that it was legally permissible for a workman to raise an Industrial Dispute for the purpose of establishing himself to be a workman of the establishment, which claimed him to be a contract labourer. The learned Single Judge had also placed reliance on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in The Superintending Engineer, Erode Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Erode vs. Inspector of Labour, Erode and others, made in W.P.No.4061 of 2013 etc., (batch cases), dated 07.03.2022, in support of the said proposition. Apart from the above ground, no other ground appears to have been raised before the Writ Court.

4. We also endorse the views taken by the learned Single Judge in this regard and find no reason to interfere with the order passed therein. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed.

5. In view of the dismissal of this Writ Appeal, the appellant shall implement the award of the Labour Court passed in I.D.No.241 of 2009, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [M.S.R., J] [R.S.V.,J] 03.11.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Anu M.S.RAMESH, J.

and

R.SAKTHIVEL , J.

Anu To and CMP.No.24574 of 2025 03.11.2025