T.Subbulakshmi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16-12-2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P No. 48329 of 2025 T.Subbulakshmi
...Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by its Principal Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Local Administration, Fort St George, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner, Directorate of Rural Development and Local Administration, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
3. The Director, State Institute of Rural Development, Maraimalainagar, Chengalpattu District.
4. Government of India Rep.by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Rural Development Block, No.11, 6th Floor, CDO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003.
..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to pass orders granting regularization of service of the petitioner's husband late R.Sivaramakrishnan in the post of Core Faulty in Co-operation in State Institute of Rural Development (SIRD), Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu District, from the date of initial appointment with consequential service benefits including regular pension __________Page 1 of 6
payable to husband of the petitioner in the light of the orders passed in W.P.No.15026 of 2013 dated 04.01.2021 as well as the orders passed in W.P.No.30605 of 2012 dated 02.06.2017 in consideration of representation submitted by the petitioner dated 05.11.2025 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner :
Mr.S.Nedunchezhiyan For Respondents :
Mr.K.Surendran Additional Government Pleader - for R1 to R3 Mr.K.K.Muralitharan - for R4
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to pass orders granting regularization of service of the petitioner's husband, namely, Late R.Sivaramakrishnan in the post of Core Faulty in Co-operation in State Institute of Rural Development (SIRD), Maraimalai Nagar, Chengalpattu District, from the date of initial appointment with consequential service benefits including regular pension payable to the husband of the petitioner in the light of the order passed in W.P.No.15026 of 2013 dated 04.01.2021 as well as the order passed in W.P.No.30605 of 2012 dated 02.06.2017 in consideration of representation submitted by the petitioner dated 05.11.2025 within a time frame fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner's deceased husband was working under the third respondent on contractual basis and after repeated representations, he was __________Page 2 of 6
recommended for fixation of time scale of pay and subsequently he was issued with orders in 2007 granting UGC pay scale. However, his services were not regularized but he was continued to work on an yearly contract basis.
3. While so, a similarly placed individual who was appointed along with the petitioner's husband approached this Court in W.P.No.25636 of 2005 with a prayer to regularize his services from the date of initial appointment, which was allowed, against which, a writ appeal was filed by the respondents. However, the writ appeal was dismissed and the order passed by the learned Single Judge in the above writ petition was implemented.
4. However, the petitioner's husband passed away in a road accident in the year 2011 leaving the petitioner and two children. The petitioner requested for compassionate appointment, which was rejected solely on the ground that her husband's service was not regularized. Her representations for regularization of her husband's services were also rejected even though similarly placed persons were granted such benefits.
5. The petitioner filed W.P.No.15026 of 2013 challenging the rejection orders, which was closed by this Court with a liberty to file a fresh representation, which she submitted on 23.12.2024 and 05.11.2025. Nothing __________Page 3 of 6
moved thereafter. The petitioner now wants to give up her request for compassionate appointment and limits her relief to seek for regularization of her husband's services from the date of initial appointment with consequential monetary and retirement benefits based on such benefit granted to similarly placed individual like her deceased husband.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 05.11.2025 and dispose of the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.
7. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent have no serious objection for such an order being passed by this Court.
8. Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 05.11.2025 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. __________Page 4 of 6
9. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
16-12-2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order ssb To
1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Rurual Development and Local Administration, Fort St George, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner, Directorate of Rural Development And Local Administration, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.
3. The Director, State Institute Of Rural Development, Maraimalainagar, Chenglapattu District.
4. The Secretary To Government, Ministry of Rural Development, Block No 11, 6th Floor, CDO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi 110 003.
__________Page 5 of 6
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
ssb WP No. 48329 of 2025 16-12-2025 __________Page 6 of 6