P.GNANA PRAGASAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this Writ Petition is against an order rejecting the petitioner's claim for regularization.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Sweeper-cum- Gardner on 03.01.1966 in the fourth respondent institution, which is a Government Aided Teacher Training Institute. The petitioner, after working for a period of forty years and five months, retired from service on 30.6.2006. In the meantime, the State issued G.O.Ms.No.1399(Public(Services F)Department), dated 22.04.1971 to bring all such contingent employees to the time scale of pay, who had put in not less than five years of service. The said Government Order was not properly implemented by all the departments. Therefore another Government Order came to be passed in G.O.Ms.No.557(Education Department), dated 01.04.1981 to bring all the contingent employees who had put in not less than five years of service as on 01.04.1979 for time scale of pay w.e.f.1.7.1979. In pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.52, dated 14.1.1997 followed by G.O.Ms.No.577, dated 01.04.1981, the petitioner made several representations to the Government seeking for regularization of his service. But the same was not considered. Hence the petitioner filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.10364 of 2000 seeking for regularization of his service from 01.04.1979. By order, dated 26.06.2000, this Court directed the Director of Teacher Education Research and Training to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 27.01.2000 on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.577, dated 1.4.1981. Thereafter the present impugned order came to be passed by stating that the petitioner is not entitled for regularization of service.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Teacher Training Institutes also come within the control of the School Education Department and when G.O.Ms.No.577 was specifically passed in respect of contingent staffs working in aided schools of Education Department, the same relief cannot be denied to the petitioner by stating that the said Government order does not cover the staff of Teacher Training Institute. He also invited my attention that similarly placed persons namely contingent staffs working in Teacher Training Institute were given regularization by the Government through G.O.Ms.No.156, School Education Department dated 23.12.1997 and G.O.Ms.No.46, Education Department, dated 8.2.2000. In both the Government orders, the reliance was placed in G.O.Ms.No.52, dated 14.01.1977. He also relied on a decision of this Court reported in 2009 Writ L.R.43 in the case of V.Lingam .vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others, in support of his contention that the petitioner is entitled for regularization of his service.