S JAGANNATHAN Vs. COMMISSIONER TANJORE MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Contending that the petitioners were appointed by the firstrespondent/Municipality as contingent staff in the Thiruvalluvar Theatre at Tanjore, run by the first respndent/Municipality, and that they have completed 240 days of service in twelve calendar months, the petitioners seek a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to regularise their services. Contending that the petitioners were appointed by the first respondent/Municipality as contingent staff in the Thiruvalluvar Theatre at Tanjore, run by the first respndent/Municipality, and that they have completed 240 days of service in twelve calendar months, the petitioners seek a writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to regularise their services.

(2.) Mrs.G.Devi, learned counsel for the first respondent, placing reliance on the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first respondent, submits that the petitioners were appointed as contingent staff only for running the Thiruvalluvar Theatre at Tanjore and therefore, they are not entitled to seek regularization of service as Municipal servants.

(3.) Mr.M.S.Palanisamy, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 2 and 3, substantiating the stand taken by the learned counsel for the first respondent, and placing reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in (i) Ramakrishna Kamat v. State of Karnataka, (2003) 3 SCC 374; and (ii) Chanchal Goyal (Dr) v. State of Rajasthan,(2003) 3 SCC 485, submitted that temporary employees are not entitled to seek regularization of services.