BALAKRISHNAN Vs. THE DISTRICT OF LIBRARIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The relief sought for in this writ petition is to direct the respondents to regularize the service of the writ petitioner in the post of Village Librarian in Karur District.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner made a contention that the writ petitioner was appointed as part time Librarian at Andipatti village Library for a consolidated salary of Rs. 925/- per month. The writ petitioner was working as part time Librarian continuously from 02.02.1995. However, the request of the writ petitioner to regularize his service was not considered. The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that the writ petitioner ought to have been appointed as regular Village Librarian as per the rules in force.

(3.) The post of Village Librarian is covered by the rules. The recruitment to the post of Village Librarian has to be undertaken only in accordance with the rules in force. The regularization as such to the post of Village Assistant cannot be granted contrary to the rules in force. This apart, even at the time of filing of the writ petition, the writ petitioner was aged about 52 years old and now he would be about 57 years of age. Thus, the question of considering his case for regularization, not at all arise. This apart, the benefit of regularization and permanent absorption cannot be granted contrary to the service rules in force. All appointments has to be made only in accordance with the service rules in force. The legal principles in this regard are settled by the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of The Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi (3) and others reported in (2006) 4 Supreme Court Cases 1 , wherein, at Paragraph 5, 10, 12, 13, 14, 20 and 43 to 50, it is held as follows: