← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/6390/2013closed

A. Packiaraj v. Madurai City Municipal

2022-11-09Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.11.2022

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and M.P.(MD)No.3 of 2013 1.A.Packiaraj

2. K.T.K.Thangamani Ninaivu, Madurai Mavatta Amaippusara Thozhilar Sangam, Rep. by its General Secretary, M. Nandasingh, Door No.146, Puttu Thoppu Road, Madurai.

... Petitioners Vs.

1. The Municipal Corporation, represented by its Commissioner, Madurai.

2. K.Muthumanickam

3. S.Palanivasan

4. V.Sabarinathan

5. P.Saravana Kumar

6. M.Raja

7. S.Mani

8. B.Sahayaraj

9. A.Muthukrishna Kumar

10. V.Suresh Kumar

11. P.Nagabalan

12. P.Malaisamy

13. R.Baskar

14. A.Muthukrishnan

15. P.Mutharasu

16. M.Senthil Kumar

17. K.Asaithambi

18. A.Prabhu

19. A.Ravi

20. A.Vengatesan

21. P.Soundarapandi

22. G.Selvakumar

23. M.Jeyamurugan

24. S.Nagarajan 1/4

25. R.Balamurugan

26. P.Sivarajan

27. C.Velmuruganantham

28. M.Kasi Viswanathan

29. R.Jaganathan

30. R.Jeyapandi

31. Dhamodharan

32. K.Selvapandi

33. V.Gnanasekaran

34. S.Sankar Ganesh

35. P.Muruga Pandiyan

36. K.Saravana Kumar

37. B.Rajasekaran

38. T.Saravana Kumar

39. S.Kannan

40. G.Varadha Rajan

41. P.Saravana Kumar

42. V.Ramesh Kumar

43. N.Ravikumar

44. B.Prabu

45. B.Devaraj

46. Jesu Raja

47. M.Sivamurugan

48. M.Manikandan

49. M.Anbarasan

50. S.Satheesh Kumar

51. G.Narayana Kumar

52. N.Arumugam

53. A.V.Rajaram

54. N.Muthukannan

55. G.Balasubramanian

56. N.Sethupandian

57. M.Senthil

58. S.Suresh

59. M.Mohammed Ibrahim

60. S.Navaneetha Kannan

61. N.R.Selvakumar

62. C.Arockia Baskar

63. G.Rajasekaran

64. M.Muthukumar

65. P.Kartick

66. G.Ravisankar

67. P.Christopher

68. K.Manikandan

69. M.Velpandi

70. V.Saravanan ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent, dated 26.03.2013 in Ma.Ni.10 2/4

(Ma.Ni.2)/34951/2012, quash the same and consequently, direct the first respondent to fill up the vacancies in the post of Drivers by giving wide publicity and advertisement in daily News Papers having larger circulation and also by other modes and to make appointment by considering the case of members of second petitioner Trade Union also along with other eligible persons and to give preference to members of second petitioner Trade Union in appointment when other things are equal compared to other pension based on their service. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Ajoy Khose for Mr.A.Rahul For R1 : Mr.R.Murali For R-2 to R-70 : No appearance

ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed for Writ of Certiorari to quash the impugned order, dated 26.03.2013, with the consequential prayer to direct the first respondent to fill up the vacancies for the post of Driver by giving wide publicity and advertisement in daily News Papers having larger circulation and also by other modes and to make appointment by considering the case of members of second petitioner Trade Union also along with other eligible persons and to give preference to members of second petitioner Trade Union in appointment when other things are equal compared to other persons based on their service.

2. The first petitioner is working in the first respondent Corporation as Driver. The second petitioner is a Sangam representing the unorganized sector workers.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Counsels appearing for both the petitioners and the respondents submitted that the petitioner has raised an Industrial Dispute in I.D.No.33 of 2013 which is pending before the Labour Court, Chennai. The issue raised in Industrial Dispute as well as the issue raised in the writ petition are similar.

4. Therefore, this Court deems it fit to close this writ petition and allow the parties to contest the issue before the Labour Court.

5. However, the respondents No.2 to 70 are not the parties before the Industrial Dispute. The respondents No.2 to 70 are recruited by the first respondent as daily wages in the Municipality Corporation. The first and second petitioners are fighting for the same post in which the respondents No.2 to 70 are recruited. Therefore, the petitioners are directed to file amendment petition before the Industrial Dispute and include the respondents No.2 to 3/4

70.

6. This Court has granted an Interim injunction, dated 18.04.2013, the same shall continue until the disposal of the Industrial Dispute which is pending before the Labour Court.

7. With the above said observation, this Writ Petition is closed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar () // True Copy // /12/2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) jbr To The Municipal Corporation, represented by its Commissioner, Madurai.

Copy to:

The Judge, Labour Court, Chennai.

+1 CC to M/s.VEERA ASSOCIATES, Advocate ( SR-53833[F] dated 09/11/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.A.RAHUL, Advocate ( SR-54071[F] dated 10/11/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.R.MURALI, Advocate ( SR-54170[F] dated 11/11/2022 ) 09.11.2022 AMS(01.12.2022) 4P 6C 4/4