GANESAN Vs. COMMISSIONER SIVAGANGAI MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in this writ petition is seeking for a Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to regularize the petitioners' appointment from the date of completion of three years.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that all of them were appointed as Scavengers by the first respondent through his order dated 30.11.1998 with effect from 04.11.1998. They were originally appointed as temporary workers on consolidated scale of pay for a period of one year. They were duly sponsored by the District Employment Office. Their tenure were further extended for two years with 10% increment, as per G.O.No.71, dated 05.05.1998 issued by the Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department. The petitioners are entitled to be considered for regularization after completion of three years from the date of their initial appointment. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to be regularized with effect from 04.12.2001. The first respondent sent a communication to the 2nd respondent for regularizing the petitioners and the said proposal was also forwarded to the 3rd respondent on 03.01.2002. However, no steps were taken to regularize the service of the petitioner. Finally on 28.02.2006 the 3rd respondent passed an order and regularized the petitioner's service only with effect from 01.03.2006. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the issue involved in this case is directly covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court made in W.A.No.273 of 2011, dated 02.03.2011 whereinm the Division Bench has considered as to whether the said ban order can be stated as reason for denying the benefit of regularization and found in favour of the appointees therein.