D. ARASU Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH originally the petitioners have challenged the order of the 2nd respondent dated 11.12.2012 and prayed for a consequential direction to direct the respondents to regularize their services from the date on which they have completed ten years of service on daily wage basis in the light of the order dated 11.04.2011 passed by this Court in W.P. No. 8745 of 2011, with all consequential service and monetary benefits within a time frame, by way of filing M.P. No. 1 of 2014, the petitioners have prayed for amending the relief sought, which was also ordered on 03.09.2014. Now, the prayer of the petitioners in this writ petition is to quash G.O.Ms. No. 92 Higher Education (G2) Department dated 06.06.2012 on the file of the first respondent and the consequential proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 9318/P4/2011 dated 11.12.2012 on the file of the second respondent and consequently to direct the respondents to regularize their services in the cadre of Sweeper from the date of their initial appointment with all consequential service and monetary benefits within a time frame that may be stipulated by this Court.

(2.) THE 1st petitioner Arasu belongs to Schedule Caste Community. He registered his name in the District Employment Exchange, Vellore on 26.10.1988. Based on the sponsorship from the Employment Exchange, the 3rd respondent appointed him as Scavenger (toilet cleaner) in the college. Likewise, the 2nd petitioner, registered his name in the District Employment Exchange, Dharmapuri on 09.01.2001 and based on the sponsorship from the Employment Exchange, he was appointed by an order dated 07.05.2001 by the 4th respondent as daily wage Scavenger (toilet cleaner).

(3.) A counter affidavit is filed refuting the allegations. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioners cannot seek relief under G.O.Ms. No. 22, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 28.02.2006, since, later, a G.O. was passed in G.O.Ms. No. 74, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 27.06.2013. It is further averred that now only G.O.Ms. No. 74 governs the field and hence the claim made under G.O.Ms. No. 22 has to be rejected.