PONNUSAMY Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR VELLORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents.

(2.) IT has been stated that the petitioners had been serving under the respondents, for several years, in different capacities, at various places. While so, instead of regularizing their services, they had been asked to seek employment from a private person on the ground that the tender had been floated to hand over the maintenance of the project in question, at Yelagiri hills.

(3.) IN the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the second respondent, it has been stated that the petitioners had been engaged, as casual workers, on a fixed amount of salary, on a temporary basis, for the maintenance of the garden of the Yelagiri Hill Tourism and Development Society. The petitioners had been engaged, purely on a temporary basis, on condition that their services could be terminated, at any time, without prior notice. As the petitioners had taken up the works of maintaining the garden of the Yelagiri Hill Tourism and Development Society accepting the said conditions, it is not open to them to claim that they should be regularized in service. Further, the writ petition is not maintainable in view of the fact that the Yelagiri Hill Tourism and Development Society had not been made a party to the present writ petition, even though the petitioners had been engaged in the maintenance works relating to the said society.