V DHANRAJ Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR KANCHEEPURAM DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed as Nursery Gardener (N.M.R) in the year 1984 in the second respondent Panchayat Union. He was continuously employed, without any break, on daily wages basis. While so, when the regular Night Watchman Mr.Raghavan died in the year 1995, the petitioner was appointed as Night Watchman, on daily wages basis, in the place of Mr.Raghavan. He continued to work as Night Watchman in the cement godown of the second respondent Panchayat Union from 14.07.1995 onwards. The first respondent issued a circular dated 31.07.1997, directing the Commissioners of all Panchayat Unions to furnish the details of the daily wages employees employed as Night Watchman; whether the posts are sanctioned; whether the Panchayat Unions have the financial capacity to pay to those Night Watchman and also to give reason for creating Night Watchman post. The second respondent gave a reply dated 26.08.1997 stating that the petitioner has been working from 14.07.1995 as Night Watchman, on daily wages basis and that the second respondent has financial capacity to pay salary, if a regular post is created. The second respondent further stated therein that the valuable properties of the Panchayat Union have to be safeguarded and that therefore, the post of Night Watchman is essential.

(2.) In this regard, the circular dated 31.07.1997 of the first respondent is extracted hereunder: ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]... The relevant passage from the reply dated 26.08.1997 of the second respondent is extracted hereunder: ...[VERNACULAR TEXT OMMITED]...

(3.) Thereafter, when the Government issued order in G.O.Ms.No.93, Rural Development Department, dated 26.03.1997 directing the Local Bodies not to employ any employees on daily wages basis, from the date of the said G.O., the second respondent wrote a letter dated 17.11.1997 to the first respondent seeking certain clarification. In the said letter, the second respondent stated that the petitioner was appointed as Night Watchman, pursuant to the resolution passed by the second respondent Panchayat Union. It is also stated that two Office Assistant posts are vacant and the Divisional Development Officer has also approved the appointment of the petitioner as Night Watchman. The second respondent further pointed out that G.O.Ms.No.93 did not direct the Local Bodies to terminate the already serving daily wages employees and it was only directing the Local Bodies not to appoint employees, on daily wages basis from 26.03.1997 onwards. While so, the petitioner was abruptly denied work from 02.07.2000, without assigning any reason.