THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU Vs. J.POONGOTHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State has filed this Appeal as against the order passed by the learned single Judge made in W.P. No. 33784 of 2006 dated 16.04.2010.

(2.) The respondent/petitioner was appointed as Junior Assistant in the Adult Education Unit, Thiruvallur, under Rule 10(a)(i) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules dated 31.12.1981 through Employment Exchange. After expiry of three years of service, she was ousted from service for want of vacancy on 31.03.1984. However, once again, the respondent/petitioner was re-appointed as Junior Assistant on 29.06.1984. But her service was not regularised on the ground that she was not in service on 25.06.1984 as per G.O.Ms. No. 996 dated 22.02.1984. As there was a ban imposed on appointment and the respondent/petitioner was reappointed on 29.06.1984 by the Chief Educational Officer. The grievance of the respondent/petitioner is that the State has not regularised the service either from the date of initial appointment or at least from the date of reappointment though she had put in service of more than 10 years. Therefore, the respondent/petitioner filed an application in O.A. No. 5980 of 1984 for a direction to the respondent therein to regularise her service from the date of initial appointment namely 31.12.1981 and subsequently, a petition was filed to amend the prayer seeking for regularisation of service at least from the date of re-appointment in 1984.

(3.) The specific contention of the respondent/petitioner was that she was entitled for regularisation of service in terms of G.O. No. 259 P & A Department dated 24.08.1989 on the basis of the service rendered by her from 1981 to 1984. However, the Tribunal, by order dated 24.12.1994, issued a direction to regularise her service from 05.07.1984. Since the said direction was not complied with, the respondent/ petitioner filed a Contempt Application for non-compliance of the said order dated 24.12.1994. When the Contempt Petition was filed, the State regularised the service of the respondent/petitioner, by proceedings dated 14.06.1995, w.e.f. 10.04.1990 on the ground that the Government has allotted the post of Junior Assistant only on 10.04.1990. By order dated 23.02.1996, the District Educational Officer, Villupuram, regularised the service of the respondent/petitioner in the post of Junior Assistant w.e.f. 10.04.1990 on condition that the period of probation would be completed as per the condition imposed by the Rules. The Contempt Petition was closed giving liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the respondents seeking regularisation of service from the date of initial appointment. Pursuant to the same, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 11.03.1997 to the respondents to regularise her service from the date of her initial appointment and not from the date of subsequent appointment. However, as no order was passed on such representation, the petitioner filed O.A. No. 5406 of 1998 before the Tribunal. However, on abolition of the Tribunal, the matter was transferred to the file of this Court and re-numbered as W.P. No. 33784 of 2006.