M.Tiruppathi v. The Chief Engineer/Personnel

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.08.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN M.Tiruppathi ... Appellant -Vs1.The Chief Engineer / Personnel, 8th Floor, Eastern Wing, NPKRR Maaligai, 144 Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2.The Superintending Engineer, Madurai Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, K.Pudhur, Madurai-625 007.

... Respondents PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying this Court to set aside the order dated 22.07.2025 made in W.P.(MD)No.14245 of 2019 on the file of this Court.

For Appellant : Mr.D.Sivasurya for Mr.S.Ramesh

JUDGMENT

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.] This intra-Court appeal is preferred as against the order dated 22.07.2025 made in W.P.(MD)No.14245 of 2019, whereby the Writ Court rejected the claim of the appellant / writ petitioner in seeking for retrospective regularization, pursuant to the order passed by the authority under the Tamil Nadu Industrial Establishments (Conferment of Permanent Status to Workmen) Act, 1981.

2.It is the contention of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the appellant is entitled for his service to be regularized retrospectively, in view of the decisions taken by the competent authority / Inspector of Labour dated 04.08.2009. Since the order was passed only regularizing the service from 24.10.2015, the appellant had come up with the claim, seeking for retrospective regularization.

3.The Writ Court has considered the claim of the appellant and found that the appellant had already approached this Court with the similar relief in W.P.(MD)No.7764 of 2011, seeking for regularization and the Writ Petition was

allowed on 12.06.2012. Pursuant to the order passed, services of the appellant was conferred with permanent status with effect from 23.10.2013. Thereafter, pursuant to the appointment order issued, the appellant had absorbed in permanent service and regularized with effect from 24.10.2015 by the order passed by the Department on 17.05.2016.

4.The appellant had accepted this order and based on the order passed on 17.05.2016, his service came to be regularized with effect from 24.10.2015. After availing orders in the Writ Petition and also getting his service regularized, the appellant had approached the authority after the period of five years, seeking to regularize his service on completion of 480 days of service. 5.The order came to be passed by the Inspector of Labour on 04.08.2009, allowing the claim of the appellant in respect of regularizing the service on completion of 480 days of service. Such order was challenged by the Electricity Board before this Court in W.P.(MD)Nos.1687 to 1689 of 2010 and the Writ Petitions were dismissed on 07.09.2010. However, when the orders of the Writ Court were put to challenge in the Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD)Nos.772, 773 and 775 of 2019, the Division Bench of this Court has allowed the Writ Appeals and set aside the orders of the Writ Court.

6.The Writ Court, on finding that when the appellant was a party to the same and he has already lost his case by the order passed in the Writ Appeal, further his service has been regularized with effect from 24.10.2015 pursuant to the earlier order passed by the Writ Court, rejected the claim of the appellant and dismissed the Writ Petition. Thus, we do not find any error or infirmity in the decision taken by the Writ Court warranting interference by this Court. 7.Accordingly, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. [S.M.S, J.] & [G.A.M., J.] 14.08.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Yuva

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

AND G.ARUL MURUGAN , J.

Yuva 14.08.2025