The State of Tamil Nadu v. A.Vellaiammal

JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) This appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 02.06.2015 made in W.P.No.15406 of 2015.

¶2The 5 contesting respondents were engaged as part time Sweeper or part time Watermen or women in various Government Schools or Panchayat Union Schools. The date of appointment or initial engagement of them have been given as follows: Sl.No. Date of Appointment

1.

02.06.1982

¶21978

3.

27.12.1985

4.

29.12.1993

5.

26.07.1971

¶3Since they have been working for long years as part time Sweepers or Watermen or women, initially though they sought for regularisation of their service on completion of 10 years part time employment under G.O.(Ms).No.22 P&AR Department dated

28.02.2006, at one point of time they requested atleast their services can be treated for the purpose of getting the special time scale of pay i.e. Rs.1300-3000 + Rs.300/- only as Part Time Sweepers.

¶4This arrangement was possible based on the various Government Orders viz., G.O.(Ms).No.234 Finance (Pay Cell) Department dated 01.06.2009, G.O.(Ms).No.653 Home Department dated 07.08.2009 and G.O.(Ms).No.385 Finance Department dated

01.10.2010.

¶5In fact, similarly placed persons i.e. Part time employees seeking the said benefit under the various G.Os. referred to above have already approached this Court, where in several cases orders were passed by this Court directing the Government to bring them under the special time scale of pay, accordingly such benefits had been extended to them.

¶6Therefore seeking the same relief, these contesting respondents filed the said writ petitions seeking for a mandamus for directing the respondents therein who are the appellants herein to regularise the services of the petitioners in the light of the G.O.(Ms).No.385 dated

01.10.2010 etc.

¶7The said writ petition was heard by the Writ Court and ultimately the learned Judge has observed that, though a regularisation has been sought for citing G.O.(Ms).No.22 as referred above, however they are entitled to get atleast the special time scale of pay on par with similarly placed persons in view of the G.Os. referred to above and such kind of orders since have already been passed in number of cases by this Court, such a benefit can be extended to these contesting respondents/ petitioners also and accordingly the learned Judge by impugned order dated 02.06.2015 given a direction to the respondents in the writ petition who are the appellants herein to grant the benefit to the respondents/ petitioners as provided in G.O.(Ms).No.385 Finance Department dated

01.10.2010.

¶8Aggrieved over the same, the appellants preferred this appeal. In support of the appeal, Mr.R.Kumaravel, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the appellants would contend that, insofar as the services of the contesting respondents is concerned, they were not appointed by the proper appointing authority, they have been engaged by the School Headmaster concerned only on adhoc basis and in some Schools they might have even been engaged by the Parents Teachers Association, therefore it cannot be treated that they were appointed through a proper method of appointment.

¶9Nevertheless on need basis if at all these respondents service had been utilised by the School concerned only as a Part time Sweepers, it would not ipso facto make them for claiming any right for seeking regularisation much less under G.O.(Ms).No.22 referred to above.

¶10When that being the position, the very prayer sought for by these respondents before the Writ Court itself ought not to have been entertained.

¶11The learned Additional Government Pleader further would contend that, in some of the cases that kind of temporary employees could have been brought under regular time scale of pay or atleast special time scale of pay, but in those cases, those employees were engaged initially on temporary basis but as a full time employee not as a part time employee.

¶12Therefore whatever the benefits that has been extended to a temporarily appointed full time employee cannot be extended to part time employee that too engaged by the School Headmaster concerned, therefore no parity cant be sought for by these respondents which has been erroneously considered by the learned Judge who ordered in the said writ petition, therefore the impugned order is liable to be interfered with, he contended.

¶13We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respondents also.

¶14In fact, the issue raised in the writ petition is not first time has come before this Court. The engagement of this kind of Part time Sweepers in various Government Institutions and Organisations is a continuous process. For instance, in Police Station throughout the Tamil Nadu, this kind of Part time Sweepers were engaged to keep the building and premises of the Police Station clean.

¶15No doubt, the said job is not a full time job only a part time job, nevertheless their services is indispensable because every day the Police Station premises have to be kept clean, like that, in School concerned, the same position prevails where the School premises should be kept clean, for the purpose the part time Sweeper atleast is required on daily basis. Therefore, not only in the School Education Department but various Departments in the State of Tamil Nadu, this kind of part time Sweepers / employees have been engaged.

¶16In order to streamline such engagement and to give some immediate pay protection, the Government thought it fit to bring a Policy decision as announced by the Head of the Government i.e., the Chief Minister of the State.

¶17Accordingly, two Government Orders have been issued, the first Government Order is G.O.(Ms).No.653 Home Department dated

07.08.2009 wherein the following orders have been passed by the Government: "3/ khz;g[kpF Kjyikr;rh; mth;fs; rl;lkd;wg; nguitapy; fhty; Jiw khdpaf; nfhhpf;ifapd; nghJ jd;Dila gpw mwptpg;g[fSld; khepyj;jpYs;s btt;ntW fhty; epiya';fspy; jw;nghJ 1149 gFjpneu Jg;g[ut[g; gzpahsh;fs; cs;sdh;/ ,th;fs; bjhFg;g[ Cjpakhf khjk; xd;Wf;F U:/900/- – bgw;W tUfpd;wdh;/ ,th;fs; ePz;l fhykhf j';fSf;F fhy Kiw Cjpak; mspf;fg;gl ntz;Lbkd;W nfhhpf;if itj;j tz;zk; cs;sdh;/ ,e;j ePz;l fhy nfhhpf;ifapid Vw;W "fhty; epiya Jg;g[uthsh;" vd;w gzpaplj;jpy; U:/1300 - 3000 vd;w fhy Kiw Cjpa tpfpjj;jpy; U:gha; 300 ju Cjpaj;Jld; (Grade Pay) 01/08/2009 Kjy; ,th;fspd; gzptud; Kiwg;gLj;jg;gLk; vd mwptpj;Js;shh;/ 4/

khz;g[kpF

Kjyikr;rh;

mth;fspd; mwptpg;gpw;fpz';f fhty; Jiwapy; gzpahw;Wk; 1149 Jg;g[ut[ gzpahsh;fSf;F jpUj;jpa rpwg;g[ fhyKiw Cjpatpfpjkhd U:/1300/- – 3000-- vd;w Cjpa tpfpjk; kw;Wk; ju Cjpak; U:/300/- khjk; xd;wpw;F vd eph;zak; W.A.No.2121oofo2019 bra;J muR MizapLfpwJ/ nkYk; ,e;j gzpapl';fs; fhypahFk; nghJ mtw;wpy; ntW vtiuak[ ; gzp mkhj; ;jf;TlhJ vd;Wk; fhty; epiya';fspy; Jg;g[ut[ gzp nkw;bfhs;Sk; gzpahshf; is ,dpnky; "fhty; epiya Jg;g[uthshf; s;" (Police o Station o Cleaner) vd miHff; g; gl ntz;Lk; vd;Wk; muR MizapLfpwJ/ ,e;j g[jpa gzpapl';fspy; 1300/- - o3000/- vd;w Cjpatpfpjj;jpy; U:/300/- ju Cjpaj;Jld; ,thf; spd; gzp 1/8/2009 Kjy; tud;KiwgLj;j muR MizapLfpwJ/ 5/ ,e;j Miz epjpj;Jiwapd; m/rh/F/vz;/ 46069/CMPC/09. ehs; 07/08/09 ,irt[ld; btspaplg;gLfpwJ/"

18.oTheosecondoGovernmentoOrderoisoG.O.(Ms).No.385oFinanceo (PayoDivision)oDepartmentodatedo01.10.2010,owhereotheofollowingoordero hasobeenopassed: "2010,obrgl; k;gh; jp';fs;. 15-Mk; ehsd;W eilbgw;w nguwp"h; mz;zh E}w;whz;L E}yf jpwg;g[ tpHhtpy; Jg;g[ut[g; gzpahshf; spd; thH;thjhu eyd; fUjp khz;g[kpF Kjyikr;rh; mthf; s; btspapl;l mwptpg;gpidj; bjhlhe; ;J muR mYtyf';fs; kw;Wk; cs;shl;rp mikg;g[fspy; jpdf;Typ mog;gilapy; myy; J bjhFg;g{jpaj;jpy; Fiwe;jgl;rk; K:d;W Mz;Lfs; gzp Koj;j Jg;g[ut[g; gzpahshf; Sf;F fPHf; z;l epge;jidfSf;Fg;glL; U:/1300-3000 + U:/300-- ju Cjpak; bfhzl; rpwg;g[f; fhyKiw Cjpak; (-SpecialoTimeoofoPay) ephz; apj;J muR MizapLfpwJ/ nkYk;. ,thf; SfF; muR mYtyhf; s; jw;nghJ bgw;WtUk; mftpiyg;goa[ld; nrh;j;J muR mYtyh;fSf;F mt;tg;nghJ tH';fg;gLk; mftpiyg;go cah;t[k; Mz;LnjhWk; mog;gil Cjpak; kw;Wk; ju Cjpaj;jpy; K:d;W rjtpfpjk; Mz;L Cjpa cah;t[k;

nrh;j;J

tH';f

,jd;K:yk;

muR MizapLfpwJ:- m) Jg;g[ut[ gzpahsh;fs; jpdf;Typ mog;gilapy; my;yJ bjhFg;g{jpaj;jpy; muR mYtyfj;jpnyh my;yJ cs;shl;rp mikg;g[fspnyh Fiwe;jgl;rk; K:d;W Mz;Lfs; gzpahw;wpapUf;f ntz;Lk;/ M) rk;ke;jg;gl;l Jiwj; jiyth;fs; j';fsJ Jiwapd; fPH; gzpahw;Wk; Jg;g[ut[ gzpahsh;fspd; bgah;fs; - vz;zpf;if kw;Wk; gzpg[hpe;j fhyk; Fwpj;j gzpg;gl;oaiy rhpghh;j;J jf;f rhd;wpLjy; ntz;Lk;/"

¶19That apart, orders have been passed time and again by various Departments bringing the Part time Sweepers in a special time scale of pay as stated supra i.e., Rs.1300-3000/- with Grade Pay of Rs.300/-.

¶20Therefore even though these contesting respondents sought for a regularisation of their services from their initial engagement as a regular employees for getting all such benefits, the learned Judge restricted the relief only to the extent to bring them on par with others especially under G.O.(Ms).No.385.

¶21The learned Judge in fact has relied upon an order passed earlier by the very same Judge in W.P.No.33950 of 2014 in the matter of N.Karuppayee Vs. The Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Chennai, also the earlier order which has been passed in the matter of M.Jaya Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu having been sought for review, that review application also has been considered by the very same Judge, which was disposed by order dated 08th December 2014, where the learned Judge quoted G.O.(Ms).No.653 and the review application was dismissed. In fact, pursuant to the said dismissal of the review application, insofar as the case of the Jaya, who was similarly placed like the contesting respondents herein, orders have been passed by the District Educational Officer, Vellore, where the said Jaya was brought under special time scale of pay of Rs.1300-3000/- with Grade Pay of Rs.300/-. A proceedings to that effect issued by the DEO, Vellore on 13.07.2016 also has been placed before us for our perusal. Apart from this proceeding, several such proceedings for individual cases time and again had been issued by various Departments including the School Education Department bringing such part time employees for a special time scale of pay, such a minimum pay protection should be extended to these kind of employees that was the Policy decision taken by the Government which is reflected in the two Government Orders atleast cited herein above.

¶22When that being the position, the learned Judge, who relying upon his earlier orders as well as the relevant Government Orders, has directed to extend such benefits to these contesting respondents, therefore such an approach and conclusion reached by the learned Judge cannot be found fault with, therefore we do not find any reasons to interfere with the impugned order, resultantly the intra-Court appeal fails, hence it is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. [R.S.K., J.] [K.B., J.]

25.08.2023 Index : Yes/No Speaking Order : Yes/No

Sgl

R. SURESH KUMAR, J. and

K.KUMARESH BABU, J. Sgl

25.08.2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 25.08.2023 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Secretary to Government, School Education (R1) Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 9. 2.The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai – 6. 3.The District Elementary Education Officer, Villupuram District, Villupuram. 4.The District Elementary Education Officer, Vellore District,Vellore. 5.The District Elementary Education Officer, Thiruvallur District, Thiruvallur. 6.The District Elementary Education Officer, Cheyyaru, Thriuvannamalai District. ... Appellants Vs. 1.A.Vellaiammal 2.M.Parvathi 3.R.Pachiammal 4.P.Muthukumaran 5.Parvathi Ammal ... Respondents Prayer : Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, praying to set aside the order dated 02.06.2015 in W.P.No.15406 of 2015. For Appellants : Mr.R.Kumaravel Additional Government Pleader For Respondents : Mr.R.Jayaprakash, for R2, R4 & R5 : No appearance for R1 and R3