G.KRISHNAMURTHY Vs. CHAIRMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was appointed by the erstwhile Vandavasi Rural Electric co- operative society Ltd. The said society was started in the year 1985 by receiving subsidy from State and Central Governments. Societies such as this one was functioning in Kumbakonam and Thirumayam, and these societies cater to the supply of electricity to the villages which fall within their jurisdiction. The society and the other societies were taken over by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and had been functioning under it with effect from 6.4.02. The petitioner was appointed in the erstwhile society as Office Assistant and he was made permanent employee of the society with effect from 1.7.00 by converting his post from Office Assistant to Helper cadre and he was receiving his monthly salary and other allowances. The petitioner was also discharging his duties to the satisfaction of the superiors.

(2.) Whileso, on the 1st respondent taking over all the societies, a show cause notice was issued on 19.2.05 and ten days time was given to the petitioner to submit explanation. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 7.4.05, but the respondent/Board, without properly considering his explanation even as per the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act , as the petitioner had put in more than 240 days of continuous employment in the society, terminated the services of the petitioner 20.9.05. Challenging the said order of termination, the petitioner filed W.P. No.32386/05 before this Court and this Court, vide order dated 5.3.08, while disposed of the petition, however, granted liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation to the respondents for consideration. Accordingly, in compliance with the said order, the petitioner submitted his representation on 9.5.08. However, without considering the representation in proper perspective, the respondents rejected the said representation on 10.6.08, challenging which the present petition has been filed.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner was appointed in the year 2000, he was made permanent immediately after five months during July, 2000 and he was continuously serving the society and receiving salary and was even continuing after taking over of the society by the Electricity Board. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the termination of the petitioner on the ground that his appointment was not against cadre post is wholly unsustainable when persons, who were junior to him have been absorbed in the Electricity Board. In this regard, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in W.P. No.21663/02, wherein, in the petition filed by similarly placed persons, this Court, vide order dated 3.8.11, had directed the Electricity Board to regularise their services. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew aid from the Government Order in G.O. Ms. No.86 dated 12.3.01, where the Government had permitted absorption of persons such as the petitioner, which has also received the seal of approval from the Division Bench of this Court. In such circumstances, learned counsel prayed for allowing the present petition.