Govt.Of Tamilnadu, v. N.Venkatramanan

1 W.A.(MD)NO.535 OF 2020 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR W.A.(MD)No.535 of 2020 AND C.M.P.(MD)No.3712 of 2020

1. Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai - 9.

2. The Commissioner / Director of Survey and Settlement, Chepauk, Chennai.

3. The Additional Director of Survey and Land Records, Chepauk, Chennai.

4. The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Madurai - 20, Madurai District.

... Appellants / Respondents Vs.

N.Venkatramanan ... Respondent / Petitioner Prayer: Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the order dated 04.04.2019 made in W.P.(MD)No.6446 of 2017 and allow this writ appeal.

1/4

2 W.A.(MD)NO.535 OF 2020 For Appellant : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam, Government Advocate.

For Respondents : No appearance.

* * *

J U D G M E N T

The Government has filed this appeal questioning the order dated 04.04.2019 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(MD) No.6446 of 2017 filed by the respondent herein.

2. The respondent herein was appointed as Section Writer and later absorbed as Surveyor-cum-Draftsman on consolidated pay vide order dated 28.05.1984. He was later appointed as Record Clerk. In the year 2008, he was promoted as Junior Assistant and he retired from service on 30.06.2013. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that his service was regularized with effect from 1991 and not from 1984. The writ petitioner invoked G.O.Ms.No.996 Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Placements) Department dated 22.09.1984. The learned single Judge was swayed by the said submission and disposed of the writ petition in the following terms:- 2/4

3 W.A.(MD)NO.535 OF 2020 "6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was in service as on 25.06.1984. According to G.O.Ms. No.996, dated 22.09.1984, the services of the employees, who were in service in the ministerial service, as on 25.06.1984, are to be regularized with effect from 25.06.1984. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for regularization from 25.06.1984, which has also been agreed upon by the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

7. Hence, the respondents are directed to regularize the services of the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment, as per G.O.Ms.No. 996, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (placements) Department, dated 22.09.1984 and to give notional promotion to the petitioner and to pay the monetary benefits retrospectively, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

3. It is brought to our notice that in W.A.(MD)No.1028 of 2018 filed by the Government, the Division bench vide order dated 01.10.2024 had held as follows:- "5. The learned Government Advocate, however, pointed out that a similar issue had come up for 3/4

4 W.A.(MD)NO.535 OF 2020 consideration before a Co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.1392 of 2017 in Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Chennai and three others Vs. M. Mainoortheen. The first respondent therein had also filed a similar writ petition in the nature of Mandamus seeking a direction to regularise his services from the date of his initial appointment in accordance with G.O.(Ms)No.996, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Placements) Department, dated 22.09.1984. The first respondent herein is very similarly placed to the 1st respondent in W.A.(MD)No. 1392 of 2017.

6. The Division Bench had observed that G.O. (Ms)No.996, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Placements) Department, dated 22.09.1984 would not be applicable to the Tamil Nadu Survey and Land records Subordinate Services. It is specifically applicable only to the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service / Tamil Nadu Judicial Ministerial Service and also only to those who had been appointed as Junior Assistant, Typist and Steno-Typist recruited through Employment Exchange under General Rule 10(a)(i) and who are in temporary service as on 25.06.1984.

7. The 1st respondent herein does not belong to any of the aforementioned services. He was appointed 4/4

5 W.A.(MD)NO.535 OF 2020 as Draftsman (Technical Wing) under the Tamil Nadu Survey and Land Records Subordinate Services. It is obvious that G.O.(Ms)No.996, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Placements) Department, dated 22.09.1984 is not applicable to him.

8. The Co-ordinate Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.1392 of 2017, vide order dated 05.03.2024, had observed as follows :

"5. On perusal of the G.O.(Ms.)No.996 dated 22.09.1984, it is seen that the services of all the temporary personnel in the category of Junior Assistant, Typist and Steno Typist in the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service/Tamil Nadu Judicial Ministerial Service and Typist and Steno Typist in the Tamil Nadu Secretariat Service recruited through employment exchange under General Rule 10(a)(1) and who were in temporary services as on 25.06.1984 be regularised with effect from 25.06.1984 in the same category and in the Department in which they were working. But the respondent/writ petitioner was working as a Draftsman (Technical Wing) under the Tamil Nadu Survey and Land Records Subordinate Service. Hence, the G.O.(Ms.)No.

996 Personnel and Administrative Reforms 5/4

6 W.A.(MD)NO.535 OF 2020 (Placements) Department, dated 22.09.1984 is not applicable to the respondent herein and the writ appeal has to be allowed.

6. In the result, this Writ Appeal is allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed."

9. The ratio is directly applicable to this case.

10. Accordingly, the present Writ Appeal stands allowed. The order of the learned Single Judge is, therefore, set aside and the Writ Petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed."

Vide order dated 11.08.2025 in W.A.(MD)No.753 of 2020, we had followed the aforesaid decision. The very same approach has to be adopted in this case also. The order passed by the learned single Judge is set aside. This writ appeal stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) & (K.RAJASEKAR, J.) 12th August 2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PMU 6/4

7 W.A.(MD)NO.535 OF 2020 G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

AND K.RAJASEKAR, J.

PMU W.A.(MD)No.535 of 2020 12.08.2025 7/4