← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/24396/2022dismissed

Thulasi Raman V v. The Chief Secretary,

2025-10-17Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose7 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.(MD) No.18358 of 2023 V.Thulasi Raman ... Petitioner -vs1.The Chief Secretary Personal and Administrative Reforms (F) Department St.George Fort Chennai-600 009 2.The Chief Engineer Water Resources Organization Public Works Department Chepauk, Chennai-600 005 3.The Superintendent Engineer Water Resources Organization Lower Vaigai Project Circle Sivagangai 4.The Asst. Executive Engineer Periyar-Vaigai Basin Circle Periyar-Vaigai Division Madurai ... Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 4th respondent in his proceedings Letter No.Ko. 35/2020/524 dated 28.09.2020 and Letter No.Ko.1/2022/900(2021)/12 dated 11.01.2022 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner within the time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.B.Prasanna Vinoth For Respondents :

Mr.C.Satheesh Government Advocate

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 28.09.2020, passed by the fourth respondent, and the letter dated 11.01.2022, also issued by the fourth respondent, rejecting the request of the petitioner to regularize his service.

2. Under the impugned order, the fourth respondent has rejected the petitioner's request for regularization of service, on the ground that the petitioner did not work continuously as an N.M.R. worker for a period of thirteen years as claimed by him. By G.O.Ms.No.22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 28.02.2006, orders were issued by stating that based on the announcement of the Honourable Chief Minister on 08.02.2006, the Government has directed the services of the daily wage employees working in all Government Departments, who have rendered ten years of service as on 01.01.2006 be regularized by appointing them in the time scale of pay of the post in accordance with the service conditions prescribed for the post concerned subject to they being otherwise qualified for the post.

3. Before this Court as well as before the respondents, the petitioner has not produced any proof to show that he has been continuously working for a period of ten years as an N.M.R. worker in the Public Works Department. Even though before this Court the petitioner has produced a certificate said to have been issued by the Executive Engineer, PWD, WRO, Periyar Vaigai Basin Division, Madurai-2, for the purpose of proving that he

has been working in the Public Works Department as an N.M.R. worker from the year 1997 onwards till 2005, a categorical statement has been made by the respondents, as seen from the impugned order as well as from the counter affidavit filed before this Court, that the petitioner never worked as an N.M.R. worker in the Public Works Department continuously for a period of ten years. Excepting for producing the alleged certificate said to have been issued by the Public Works Department, the petitioner has not produced any proof in the form of salary slips, bank account statement etc., to prove that he has been receiving salary from the Public Works Department continuously for a period of ten years.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the order dated 01.10.2020, passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P. (MD) No.8092 of 2020, wherein a similar issue was dealt with. However, the said decision will not come to the aid of the petitioner herein, as even in the said decision, excepting for the petitioners 2, 15 & 19 in the said writ petition, who had produced proof to show that they have been directly engaged as N.M.R. workers by the Public Works Department, the relief sought for by the other petitioners in the said writ petition was rejected, as they did not prove

their claim through conclusive evidence that they have been working continuously in the Public Works Department as N.M.R. workers for a period of ten years.

5. In the case on hand as well, as stated supra, since the petitioner had not produced any documentary evidence in the form of pay slips, salary vouchers and bank account statements to prove that he has been continuously receiving salary from the Public Works Department, the question of entertaining this writ petition at this stage does not arise. Learned counsel for the petitioner also admits that as on date, the petitioner is not working in the Public Works Department since 2022, when the outsourcing by the Public Works Department was stopped.

6. For the foregoing reasons, the question of interfering with the impugned order at this stage does not arise and no useful purpose would also be served, if the matter is remanded back to the respondents for fresh consideration.

7. In the result, there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is, therefore, dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

17.10.2025 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No krk To:

1.The Chief Secretary, Personal and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, St.George Fort, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Organization, Public Works Department, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.

3.The Superintendent Engineer, Water Resources Organization, Lower Vaigai Project Circle, Sivagangai.

4.The Asst. Executive Engineer, Periyar-Vaigai Basin Circle, Periyar-Vaigai Division, Madurai.

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

krk and W.M.P.(MD) No.18358 of 2023 17.10.2025