A. Gnanaprakasam v. The Director Of Collegiate Education

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 02.01.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI A.Gnanaprakasam : Petitioner Vs.

1.The Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai - 600 006.

2.The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai.

3.The Secretary, Standard Fireworks, Rajarathinam College For Women, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District.

: Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to regularize the services of petitioner as Marker (Games) in the 3rd

respondent's college from the date on which he was initially appointed i.e. 06.12.1999 and grant him all service and other monetary benefits which are he is entitled to within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Balamurugan For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjad Khan - for R1 & R2 Government Advocate

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to regularize the services of petitioner as Marker (Games) in the 3rd respondent's college from the date on which he was initially appointed i.e. 06.12.1999 and grant him all service and other monetary benefits which are he is entitled to within the time stipulated by this Court.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the third respondent college is a non-minority aided college. In G.O.Ms.No.602, dated 04.12.1997 a detailed instruction was issued for bringing the Markers

working in Government / Aided College into regular establishment. While so, the third respondent college has called list of eligible candidates from the District Employment Exchange, Virudhunagar, for the appointment to the post of Marker on 13.10.1999 and pursuant to which, the petitioner had participated in the selection process and he was appointed as Marker on 06.12.1999 by the third respondent in a sanctioned vacancy under consolidated pay of Rs.1,000/- and even today, the petitioner's post is not regularised. Hence, the petitioner made a representation on 03.08.2017 and 31.08.2020 for regularization of his service and the same was not considered. Hence, the present writ petition is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that already the third respondent has forwarded the proposal to the first respondent, however, till date the first respondent has not passed any order on the proposal forwarded by the third respondent, dated 27.12.2012.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that this Court may issue a direction to the first respondent to

consider the petitioner's representation, dated 31.08.2020 and pass appropriate orders within the time limit.

5. Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court directs the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 31.08.2020 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

02.01.2023 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No RM

To 1.The Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai - 600 006.

2.The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Madurai.

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

RM 02.01.2023