K MANOHARAN Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, PLANNING DEVELOPMENT AND SPECIAL INITIATIVES DEPARTMENT AND DIRECTOR EVALUATION AND APPLIED RESEARCH DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 04.09.2000, the Petitioner was appointed as an Office Assistant cum Driver by the second Respondent. The second Respondent appointed the Petitioner pursuant to the interview conducted on 22.07.2000, when the name of the Petitioner being sponsored by the employment exchange. The Petitioner was granted scale of pay when he was appointed. He was appointed against the regular vacancy. He was granted increments. But the first Respondent directed the second Respondent to terminate the services of the Petitioner on the ground that the Petitioner was appointed during the ban on recruitment, without obtaining prior permission of the Government. Accordingly, the second Respondent terminated the service of the Petitioner from 17.03.2003, based on the instructions given by the first Respondent on 03.03.2003.

(2.) In these circumstances, the Petitioner filed original application in O.A. No. 1083 of 2003 to quash the order of termination. On abolition of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, the matter was transferred to this Court and renumbered as W.P. No. 12569 of 2007. This Court passed an order dated 17.04.2008 setting aside the order of termination and directed the second Respondent to reinstate the Petitioner into service without backwages.

(3.) The second Respondent appointed the Petitioner as a fresh candidate on 03.11.2008. According to the Petitioner, the order dated 03.11.2008 of the second Respondent, appointing him as a fresh candidate, is contrary to the order of this Court dated 17.04.2008 made in W.P. No. 12569 of 2007. The Petitioner made a representation dated 22.10.2009 to the second Respondent, seeking to count the past services and to bring him under pensionable service that was operating upto 31.03.2003. The second Respondent sought clarification from the first Respondent on the representation dated 22.10.2009 of the Petitioner. The first Respondent in its letter dated 27.12.2010 turned down the request of the Petitioner. Based on the order dated 27.12.2010, the second Respondent also rejected the request of the Petitioner in his order dated 25.01.2011.