A MURUGESAN Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these Writ Petitions arose out of the Government passing an order in G.O.Ms.No.117 Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (AH7) Department dated 28.8.2008. By the aforesaid order, the State Government on the basis of the report given by the Commissioner of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Sciences and on finding that there were 163 casual labourers working in various institutions in the Department decided to regularise the services of those 163 Animal Husbandry Assistants from the date of issuance of the order, namely, 28.8.2008 and also to relax the relevant rules in their favour by exercising power under Rule 48 of the Tamil Nadu General Rules. By the said G.O, the State Government directed the Commissioner to take disciplinary action against all those subordinate officers, who are responsible for appointing 163 casual labourers without any Government orders. In para 4 of the said order, it was also stated that annual increments will be sanctioned only on completion of one year from the date of regularisation which will be the date of Government Order regularising their service.

(2.) IN the 1st two Writ Petitions, the contention of the petitioners was that the State Government had issued earlier an order in G.O.Ms.No.116, Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (AH6) Department dated 7.5.1997, wherein 1135 persons, who are working as Animal Husbandry were identified and the State Government sanctioned 826 posts of Animal Husbandry Assistants in a scale of pay on temporary basis and also those 826 persons were directed to be accommodated against those posts. Even in that order, it was stated that the subordinate officers who have recruited such casual labourers without any authority were directed to face with disciplinary action. IN para 10 of the order, it was stated that after the said G.O., no employment of casual labourers shall be done in the various INstitutions/farms of the Animal Husbandry Department. The said order came to be issued on knowing that there were directions given by the Tribunal in various Original Applications filed between the years 1991 and 1996, comprising of 465 persons and the Tribunal directed the State Government to regularize those persons and it is pursuant to the said direction, the case of those persons were considered.

(3.) SUBSEQUENT to the said order, G.O.Ms.No.117 Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (AH7) Department dated 28.8.2008 came to be passed as noted already. By the said G.O, the petitioners in these two Writ Petitions as well as Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.11713 and 11714 of 2009 got their services regularized by getting necessary relaxation of relevant Rules in terms of Rule 48 and as noted already the regularization had taken place only from 28.8.2008 and the increment was sought to be sanctioned only from that date.