- (1.) This writ appeal has been filed against the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. No. 14672 of 2010 dated 12.08.2011, whereby the learned single Judge issued a direction to the appellants to regularise the services of the first respondent as night watchman in the Revenue Department from the date of completion of ten years of service. The respondent was appointed as a night watchman in the revenue department on 01.03.1988 on daily wage basis. In the year 2006, the Government issued G.O.Ms. No. 22, P & AR Department dated 28.02.2006 ordering regularisation of services of the persons, who are working on temporary basis, on their completion of ten years of service by relaxing all the relevant rules. The said Government Order reads as follows:-- ABSTRACT Public Services Employees working on daily wages' Bringing into regular establishment on completion of ten years of service as on 1.1.2006-- Orders issued. PERSONNEL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REFORMS (F) DEPARTMENT G/O.Ms.No. 22 Dated: 28.2.2006 ORDER: The Hon'ble Chief Minister had announced during the Tamil Nadu Government Officials Union and Government Servants and Teachers Associations General Conference held on 8.2.2006, that the service of employees working in various Government Departments on daily wage basis who have completed more than 10 years of service as on 1.1.2006 will be regularised. 2. Based on the announcement made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 8.2.2006, the Government direct that the services of the daily wages employees working in all Government Departments, who have rendered 10 years of service as on 1.1.2006 be regularised by appointing them in the time scale of pay of the post in accordance with the service conditions prescribed for the post concerned, subject to their being otherwise qualified for the post. 3. The Departments of Secretariat may, therefore, be directed to pursue action to regularise the service of the daily wages employees working in all Government Departments, who have rendered 10 years of service as on 1.1.2006 as ordered in para 2 above, in consultation with the respective Heads of Departments wherever necessary, in special cases wherein relaxation of rules is required, proposal shall be sent to Government. 4. This order issues with the concurrence of Finance Department vide its U.O. No. 985/FS/P 2006 dated 28.2.2006. (BY ORDER OF THE GOVERNOR) Sd/- N. NARAYANAN, CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
(2.) In the said order, the Government directed all the heads of Departments to take immediate action and regularize the service of daily wage employees working in all the departments by getting relaxation order wherever necessary.
(3.) The Department having failed to implement the order, several persons approached this Court and this Court granted relief to several persons. Some of the orders passed are stated here under.:-- (i) W.A.(MD) No. 391 of 2007 dated 25-10-2007 confirming the order passed in W.P.(MD) No. 11707 of 2006 dated 22-12-2006, and the said order was already implemented by the department on 30.11.2007. (ii) W.A. No. 230 of 2009 dated 03-08-2009, confirming the order passed in W.P. No. 18126 of 2008 dated 29.07.2008, taking note of G.O.Ms. Nos. 22, dated 28.02.2006. The Division Bench held that on completion of ten years of service, services of a part-time employee shall be regularised by the department from the date of completion of ten years. In paragraphs 7 to 9 of the said judgment, the Division Bench held as follows: 7. The main submission of the learned Government Advocate is that the proposals for regularisation of the part time employees are pending before the Government. When the proposals are pending under consideration before the Government, there is no need to give any direction to the Government to regularise the services of the respondent. 8. We do not find any force in the said submission made by the learned Government Advocate. On a perusal of the entire materials, it could be seen that the respondent was working for the past 13 years as a part time employee in a Higher Secondary School. Para 3 of G.O.Ms. No. 22 P&AR(F) Department, dated 28.2.2006, reads as follows: 3. The Departments of Secretariat may therefore be directed to pursue action to regularise the services of the daily wages employees working in all Government Departments, who have rendered 10 years of service as on 1.4.2006.... 9. Though in the letter dated 20.02.1995 it has been stated that the regularisation shall not apply to the appointment on daily wages employees, if any, made on or after 01.03.1993, in G.O.Ms. No. 22 P&AR(F) Department, dated 28.02.2006, it was made clear by the Government to regularise the part time employees, who had completed 10 years of service. In fact, the services of some of the part time employees were regularised pursuant to the orders passed by this Court in the earlier writ petitions. Under those circumstances, we do not find any justification in delaying the regularisation of the services of the respondent by saying that the proposal for. regularisation of part time employees is pending for consideration before the Government. On that ground, the respondent cannot be made to wait for a long period, especially when he had completed 13 years of service, which is more than that of the required service-mentioned in G.O.Ms. No. 22 dated 28.02.2006. Under such circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the directions given by the learned single Judge. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this appeal. Accordingly, this appeal fails and is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.Ps are closed. A copy of the order shall be communicated to the State Government (Secretary), School Education Department, to issue the necessary orders in compliance with the order passed by the learned single Judge, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The special leave petition in SLP No. 1972/2009 filed against the said judgment was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court during March, 2010. The said order was already implemented. (iii) M.P. No. 1 of 2008 in WA.(SR) No. 75291 of 2009 dated 07.10.2009, confirming the order passed in W.P. No. 13499 of 2008 dated 12.06.2008, wherein the Division Bench held thus:-- 3. ...We have also noted that even on merits, the first appellant Director of School Education does not have any case. The respondent herein was employed as a Part-Time Sweeper in a Government Girls High School and her appointment was approved by the Inspector of Girls School, Kancheepuram, way back on 19.12.1999. The respondent had prayed for regularization of her services by filing the writ petition. The learned single Judge has noted that there is a government order in G.O.Ms. No. 22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 28.2.2006, which requires the Government Departments to regularize daily wage employees who have rendered ten years of service as on 1.1.2006. The respondent herein fully satisfied that requirement and had, therefore, prayed her regularization right from the initial date of her appointment. The learned single Judge has granted regularisation only after her completion of ten years of service, in tune with the above Government order. This being so, in fact on merits, the first appellant-Director of School Education has no reason to have any grievance with the order passed by the learned single Judge, apart from the fact that he does not have any case. The said order was also implemented by the department. (iv) W.A. (MD). Nos. 151 and 225 of 2009, dated 23.06.2009 confirming the Common order in W.P. (MD) No. 9726 and 9727 of 2006 dated 4.06.2008. The special leave petition filed against the said Division Bench order was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 11.02.2010. The said order was also implemented. (v) Order in W.P. No. 20662 of 2010 dated 15.09.2010 implemented by the DEO, Perambalur on 04.11.2010. (vi) Writ Appeal No. 2414 of 2010, dated 26.11.2010 confirming the order passed in W.P. No. 23080 of 2008, dated 23.12.2008. (vii) Common Order in W.P. Nos. 27488 to 27490, 27162, 27163, 26888, 26991 & 27309 of 2010 dated 02.10.2010 implemented through G.O. Ms. No. 99, School Education Department, dated 08.06.2011 and G.O. Ms. No. 121, School Education Department dated 08.08.2011. (viii) W.A.(MD) Nos. 69 & 70 of 2010, dated 20.1.2011 confirming the order passed in W.P. (MD) Nos. 1773 and 1774 of 2008, dated 4.12.2008." (ix) The Judgment passed in W.A. No. 1520 of 2010 on 25.10.2010 confirming the order passed in W.P. No. 4859 of 2009. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also confirmed the judgment passed by the Division Bench in SLP No. 8231 of 2011 dated 12.05.2011. The said order was also implemented in G.O.Ms. No. 123 dated 17.08.2011. (x) In W.P. No. 11730 of 2012, this Court ordered regularisation of the services of the petitioners therein as per the Government order, and ordered to pay arrears of salary from the date of completion of 10 years of service. The said order was implemented by issuing GO.(T) No. 117, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department dated 19.03.2013 ordering regularisation from 01.03.1984. Arrears of salary to the tune of Rs. 16,08,819/- was paid. From the above narrated facts it is evident that hundreds of persons similarly placed like that of the respondents have approached this Court seeking regularisation in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 22 P&AR Department, dated 28.2.2006 and this Court uniformly entertained their request and ordered regularisation from the date of completion of ten years of service and all such orders were implemented and arrears of pay was also paid to all those, who approached this Court. The learned single Judge, following the said orders only allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents. There is no illegality in the said order.;