Dheepan v. The Managing Director

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 27.01.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.2015, 2017, 2019, 2020, 2023, 2024, 2026 to 2029 of 2020 W.P.(MD)No.2357 of 2020

1. Dheepan ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.2357 of 2020

2. Sivaprabhu ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.2359 of 2020

3. M.Sabarainathan ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.2364 of 2020

4. S.Raja ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.2365 of 2020

5. Karthik ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.2368 of 2020 versus

1. The Managing Director, Chennai - 600 010.

2. The General Manager, Chennai - 600 010.

1/5

3. The Regional Manager, Kurivikaran Salai, Madurai.

... Respondents in all W.Ps.

Prayer in all W.Ps: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to forthwith engage the petitioner to work as Watchman on Seasonal basis under the 3rd respondent Corporation on the basis of appointment dated 28.02.2019. For Petitioner in all W.Ps.

: Mr.D.Shanmugaraja Sethupathi For Respondents in all W.Ps.

: Mr.G.Mohan Kumar COMMON ORDER The petitioners were engaged in procurement centers, during the Kharif Marketing Season for the year 2018-2019, on 30.01.2019 as seasonal Watchmen/Helper. They have filed these writ petitions for a Mandamus, directing the respondents to engage them as Watchman on seasonal basis, based on the recruitment made by the respondent Corporation on 28.02.2019.

2/5

2. The case of the petitioners is that similarly placed persons have been recruited by the respondent Corporation and therefore, they also need to be engaged for the subsequent seasons.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent corporation submits that the petitioners have been engaged as seasonal employees and the appointment order itself would reveal that it is only for seasonal purpose for a period of three months. The persons, who have been engaged for three months on seasonal basis, cannot claim it as a matter of right that they are entitled for recruitment.

4. The case of the petitioners is that similarly placed persons have been recruited by the Corporation. The petitioners, who have been appointed on temporary basis, cannot claim it as a matter of right that they have to be engaged for the subsequent seasons also. Further, it is the prerogative of the Department. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to entertain these writ petitions.

3/5

5. Accordingly, these writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 27.01.2025 ogy NCC : Yes / No.

Index : Yes / No.

Internet:Yes / NO.

To

1. The Managing Director, Chennai - 600 010.

2. The General Manager, Chennai - 600 010.

3. The Regional Manager, Kurivikaran Salai, Madurai.

4/5

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ogy W.P.(MD)Nos.2357, 2359, 2364, 2365 and 2368 of 2020 27.01.2025 5/5