W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
and WMP (MD) No.2058 of 2022
D.Shaju : Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Government,
Environment and Forest Department,
Secretariat, Chennai- 600 009.
2.The Primary Chief Conservator of Forest
and Chairman,
Head of the Forest Department,
Panagal Maaligai,
Saidapettai Chennai- 600 015.
3.The Primary Chief Conservator of Forest
and Chairman,
Arasu Rubber Corporation,
Velachery Main Road, Chennai.
4.The Managing Director,
Arasu Rubber Corporation, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District. : Respondents
P RAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of Writ of Writ of Mandamus, directing the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner as driver from the
date of the petitioner's initial appointment based on the petitioners
representation dated 06.10.2021 and also in the light of the G.O.(Ms) No.
8 Environment and Forest fR2-II dated 22.01.2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam
For Respondents : Mr.M.Senthil Ayyanar
Government Advocate for R1 to R3
Mr.A.K.Manickam for R4
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for a mandamus to the
respondents to regularize the service of the petitioner as driver from the
date of his initial appointment by considering his representation dated
06.10.2021 and also in the light of the G.O.(Ms) No.8 Environment and
Forest (FR2-II), dated 22.01.2021.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as
driver on temporary basis with the office of the Additional Principal
Chief Conservator of Forests (Social Forestry and Extension) as he
possessed all the required qualifications. The petitioner was appointed as
daily wager and the remuneration was given to him on every month by
issuing hand receipt which was signed by the petitioner and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
countersigned by the Additional Primary Chief Conservator of Forest.
3. The petitioner from the date of his initial appointment as a
temporary driver has extended his service to the satisfaction of all his
superiors without any blemish. Further, the mode of payment of his
remuneration was continuing by obtaining receipt from him till today.
Subsequently, his service was transferred to the fourth respondent/Arasu
Rubber Corporation under the same capacity as driver. The service of the
petitioner with the respondents as driver is without any break and his
service would be regularized as per law.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
the copy of the hand receipt was also issued by the second respondent to
the petitioner for the period from 2010 to 2014 and the copy of the salary
receipt issued by the fourth respondent for the period from 2014 to 2024
was also filed before this Court by way of filing an additional typed set
of papers on 14.10.2024.
5. The learned counsel drew the attention of this Court to the
letter of the Deputy Manager, dated 25.06.2014 in Ref.No.E/2068/2014,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
wherein, it is stated that the petitioner namely D.Shaju, has been engaged
to drive the vehicle in Keeriparai Division for one month period.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further
submit that the fourth respondent has issued tender notification dated
19.08.2024 for outsourcing/supply of manpower to the fourth
respondent/Arasu Rubber Corporation Limited for the period from
October, 2024 to August, 2025. He further submitted that in the
employment registration/Identity Card issued by the Department of
Employment and Training, District Employment and Career Guidance
Centre, Kanyakumari, by which the date of registration of the petitioner
as Driver (LMV) is shown as 19.12.2011 and Driver (HMV) is shown as
18.04.2015.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on an order
passed in similar cases in a batch of writ petitions in W.P.Nos.2650 of
2019 and etc., batch wherein, this Court by order dated 12.06.2019,
directed the respondents therein to regularise the service of the writ
petitioners as Drivers. The relevant portion of the order is extracted
hereunder:-
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
“22.The respondents are directed to
regularize the services of these writ petitioners
as Drivers from the date of initial appointment
of the respective writ petitioners with all
consequential and attendant benefits. The
direction shall be complied with by the first
respondent or any other competent authority
within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.”
8. In the aforesaid order dated 12.06.2019, the fourth
respondent/Arasu Rubber Corporation Limited is one of the respondents
in W.P.No.2665 of 2019. Against the said order, the Government had
preferred an appeal in W.A.No.391 of 2020 and etc., batch, in which a
Division Bench of this Court by its judgment dated 30.03.2020
confirmed the order passed by the learned Single Judge on 12.06.2019 in
W.P.Nos.2650 of 2019 and etc., batch. The relevant portion of the
judgment is extracted and the same reads as follows:-
“7. We have considered the submissions
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
raised and we find no reason to differ from the
view taken by the Division Bench while
confirming the judgment of the learned Single
Judge, issuing directions for regularization.
But, insofar as the date from which such
regularization will be given effect to being sub-
judice before the Apex Court, we direct that the
respondents/petitioners shall be regularized
and so far as the date of regularization is
concerned, the same will be governed by the
outcome of the judgment of the Apex Court. 8.
The learned Additional Advocate General, on
instructions, states that the
respondents/petitioners will be regularized and
the regularization orders will be issued within
four weeks from the date of production of a
copy of this order. We record this and direct
accordingly.”
9. The appointment of the petitioner was as early as in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
March 2010, even after the lapse of several years his service was not
regularized and therefore, he preferred representation on various dates
and the same was received by the respondents. However, the said
representations were not considered even after considering the grievance
of the similarly placed persons. In this regard, several writ petitions were
filed before this Court and those writ petitions were allowed. As against
which, the Government preferred Writ Appeals and the same was also
dismissed by this Court.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that
the question of regularization went up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and
the same was decided in favour of the writ petitioners/drivers. However,
insofar as the date from which the regularisation will be given effect is
pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. He would further submit that
considering all the surrounding circumstances, the Government have
issued G.O.(Ms) No.8, Environment and Forest (FR2-II), dated
22.01.2021 and thereby, the Government has given relaxation as
contemplated under the Government Servants (Conditions of Service
Act, 2016) and also under the Provisions of Tamil Nadu Forest
Subordinate Service Special Rules regarding age and the said
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
Government Order was also given effect. However, the case of the
petitioner was not considered by the respondent till date though similarly
placed persons got regularization of their appointment. Hence, the
petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
11. A counter-affidavit was filed by the fourth
respondent/Arasu Rubber Corporation. The learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the fourth respondent submitted that since the Forest
Department and Arasu Rubber Corporation are different entities and so th
working in Arasu Rubber Corporation cannot be considered as
continuation with that of the Forest Department. In the fourth respondent
Corporation, the writ petitioner is engaged as casual worker and has been
paid daily wages for the days he had worked temporarily as per day to
day requirements and the writ petitioner was never selected in terms of
the relevant recruitment rules. He would further submitted that as per the
salary for the month of September 2024, the petitioner was referred as
casual labourer only and not as driver.
12. The learned Standing Counsel further submitted that the
G.O.(Ms) No.8 Environment and Forest (FR2-II) dated 22.01.2021,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
cannot be directly applicable to the petitioner and it is based on the
veracity of individual cases. He also relied on the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka & Ors., v.
Umadevi reported in AIR 2006 SC 1806.
13. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the fourth
respondent further submitted that as per the minutes of the review
meeting in respect of the public sector undertakings held on 15.05.2024,
it has been decided to merge Arasu Rubber Corporation with Tamil Nadu
Tea Plantation Corporation Limited and Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation
Corporation Limited.
14. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the
fourth respondent furnished the category-wise officers and staff
details in Arasu Rubber Corporation Limited, Nagercoil as on
31.08.2024 in Annexure-1, wherein, it has been stated that there is
one post of driver vacant and one post of Line Man/Wireman and the
said details were furnished duly by the Managing Director on
24.10.2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
15. Heard both sides and perused the material available on
record.
16. It is the admitted fact that the petitioner was working as
a temporary driver in the office of the first and second respondents from
March 2010, till he jointed the fourth respondent/Arasu Rubber
Corporation Limited in the year 2014. Thereafter, he is working
continuously till date with the fourth respondent. The contention of the
fourth respondent is that the regularisation of the service of the petitioner
as a driver cannot be considered for the reason that the fourth respondent
Corporation is going to be merged with Tamil Nadu Tea Plantation
Corporation Limited and Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation
Limited. Though, there is one vacancy available to the post of Driver, the
petitioner cannot be accommodated for the said reason. In the monthly
pay slip for the month of September 2024, it is mentioned as against the
name of the petitioner as casual worker only and not as Driver.
17. According to the fourth respondent Corporation, the
petitioner was not only discharging the duty of Driver but working in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
other capacity also. According to the tender notification issued by the
fourth respondent Corporation dated 19.08.2024, the supply of
manpower is for the period from October, 2024 to August, 2025. The
petitioner is having qualification to the post of Driver and he has also
registered in the District Employment and Career Guidance Centre,
Kanyakumari, as early as Driver (LMV) on 19.12.2011 and Driver
(HMV) on 18.04.2015.
18. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance
on the order passed by this Court dated 12.06.2019 in W.P.Nos.2650
of 2019 and etc., batch, wherein this Court had directed the
respondents to regularise the temporary services of the writ
petitioners, in which the fourth respondent Corporation is also one of
the respondents therein. Thereafter, the appeal preferred by the
Government in W.A.No.391 of 2020 and etc., batch, and the same
was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court by its judgment
dated 30.03.2020 and confirmed the order passed by the learned
Single Judge on 12.06.2019 in W.P.Nos.2650 of 2019 and etc., batch.
19. According to the fourth respondent Corporation,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
11/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
there is one vacancy to the post of Driver and one vacancy to the post
of Line Man/Wireman as on 31.08.2024. This Court is of the view
that there is no impediment for the fourth respondent Corporation to
regularise the service of the petitioner as Driver since he has
completed ten years of service in the fourth respondent Corporation.
As per the tender notification dated 19.08.2024, the supply of
manpower is for the period from October, 2024 to August, 2025 and
even assuming the merger of the fourth respondent/Arasu Rubber
Corporation Limited with Tamil Nadu Tea Plantation Corporation
Limited and Tamil Nadu Forest Plantation Corporation Limited, the
services of the petitioner shall be utilized as a Driver. If the fourth
respondent Corporation is not in a position to regularise the services
of the petitioner as a Driver, he shall be accommodated and
regularised in the post of Line Man/Wireman since the petitioner has
got the required qualification i.e., 'B' License Card issued by the
Secretary, Electrical Licensing Board in Wireman Competency
Certificate No.B 136483.
20. Furthermore, the petitioner has also enclosed his
experience certificates dated 21.12.2005 and 06.02.2008 wherein, it
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
12/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
has been stated that he has been worked as Electrician. Hence, the
petitioner is eligible not only for the post of Driver which he is
working for the last 14 years but also for the post of Line
Man/Wireman since he has acquired requisite qualification and it is
evident from 'B' License issued by the Secretary, Electrical Licensing
Board in Wireman Competency Certificate No.B 136483.
21. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that
the petitioner is eligible either for regularisation of his service as
Driver from the date of his initial appointment or to be
accommodated in the post of Line man/Wireman and to regularise
his service.
22. In view of the above factual matrix, this Court is
inclined to pass the following directions:-
(i) The fourth respondent is directed to
regularize the service of the petitioner as
Driver from the date of his initial
appointment by considering his
representation dated 06.10.2021 and also in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
13/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
the light of the G.O.(Ms) No.8, Environment
and Forest (FR2-II), dated 22.01.2021;
(ii) Or, he shall be accommodated and
regularised in the post of Line man/Wireman
since he possessed the required qualification
for the said post.
(iii) Such exercise shall be completed
within a period of eight (8) weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
23. In the result, the writ petition stands allowed with the
above directions. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is
closed. No costs.
30.10.2024
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
PKN
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
14/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Environment and Forest Department,
Secretariat, Chennai- 600 009.
2.The Primary Chief Conservator of Forest
and Chairman,
Head of the Forest Department,
Panagal Maaligai,
Saidapettai Chennai- 600 015.
3.The Primary Chief Conservator of Forest
and Chairman,
Arasu Rubber Corporation,
Velachery Main Road, Chennai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
15/16
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD , J .
PKN
W.P.(MD)No.2383 of 2022
30.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
16/16