G.Ganesan, v. The Govt. Of Tamil Nadu,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:09.03.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and W.M.P(MD)No.1836 of 2017 1.G.Ganesan 2.G.Eswaran 3.N.Rajendran 4.M.Balamurugan,S/o.Mariyappan 5.S.Alagarsamy 6.M.Balamurugan,S/o.Muniyandi 7.P.Gurusamy 8.Janakiram 9.Sakthi ... Petitioners Vs.

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Madurai Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Madurai-20.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd respondent to issue separate orders to the petitioners regularizing the services from the date of the initial appointment and direct the 2nd respondent to pay all the service benefits to the petitioners within the time as fixed by this Court.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Aravindan For R1 : Mr.A.Karthick Government Advocate For R2 : Mr.R.Murali Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed for direction to the second respondent to issue separate orders to the petitioners' regularizing the services from the date of the initial appointment and direct the second respondent to pay all the service benefits to the 1/3

petitioners.

2.In the affidavit filed in support of this petition, it has been stated that the petitioners were appointed as Scavenger in the year 2006. Though the petitioners worked continuously more than several years, their services were not regularized. Hence, the petitioners have made a representation, dated 13.07.2016. So far no order has been passed by the respondents. Hence, the present Writ Petition is filed.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that this Court may issue a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioners' representation, dated 13.07.2016 in accordance with law.

4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent has no serious objection for considering the petitioners' representation.

5.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court directs the second respondent to consider the petitioners' representation dated 13.07.2016 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, if not disposed of already.

7.With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS III) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Ns Note:In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. 2/3

To 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary, Department of Municipal Administration, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

2.The Madurai Corporation, Rep by its Commissioner, Madurai-20.

+1 CC to M/s.R.MURALI, Advocate ( SR-9931[F] dated 10/03/2021 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL GP ( SR-10213[F] dated 10/03/2021 ) and W.M.P(MD)No. 1836 of 2017 09.03.2021 MJ(CO) KK(25.03.2021) 3P 5C 3/3