R.Mari v. The District Library Officer

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.08.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.A.(MD)No.868 of 2015 R.Mari .. Appellant/Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Library Officer, Ramanathapuram District Library Office, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Director of Public Libraries, Directorate of Public Libraries, Chennai - 2.

.. Respondents/Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order passed in W.P.(MD).No.1115 of 2013 dated 03.01.2014.

Prayer in WP(MD). 1115/ 2013 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.1648/A/2012 dated 14.09.2012 by the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to regularize the continuous service of the petitioner about 13 yars and appoint him in the regular post with full time scale of pay in the office of the 1st respondent. For Appellant : Mr.P.Natarajan For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, Additional Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

*************** [Judgment of the Court was delivered by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.] The unsuccessful writ petitioner is on appeal challenging the order dated 03.01.2014 dismissing W.P.(MD).No.1115 of 2013. 2.According to the appellant he was appointed as a part time worker in the office of the Branch Library, Thiruppullani. He was getting consolidated pay. Since he had completed ten years of service, he sought regularisation. Since his request was not https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

considered, he moved this Court for directing the first respondent herein to pass orders on his representation. Purusant to the direction given by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.7674 of 2012, the first respondent passed the order dated 14.09.2012 rejecting his request. Hence, he filed W.P(MD).No1115 of 2013. The learned Judge dismissed the writ petition. Hence, this writ appeal. 3.It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner was appointed only on 01.10.1999. Therefore, he could not invoke G.O.Ms.No.22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 28.02.2006. In any event, the writ petitioner was only doing work on part time basis. Only those temporary employees who worked full time and completed ten years of service were given benefit under G.O.Ms.No.22.

4.The writ petitioner is clearly not covered by any of the G.Os issued by the Government, granting regularisation. There is no merit in this writ appeal. Therefore, this writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CSII) /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Library Officer, Ramanathapuram District Library Office, Ramanathapuram District.

2.The Director of Public Libraries, Directorate of Public Libraries, Chennai - 2.

+One cc to M/s.N.Tamilmani, Advocate, SR.No.71608 +One cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR.No.71677 dsk RL/5C/2P/MR/KKR/SAR1/29/8/2017 W.A.(MD)No. 868 of 2015 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 08.08.2017