B RAVICHANDRAN Vs. GOVT OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Petition No. 4960/1997 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue a writ of certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to proceedings No. N. K. No. 01812/91/97-1 dated 28. 2. 1997 on the file of the second respondent, quash the same.

(2.) W. P. No. 14450/1997 has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent issued in N. M. No. 01812/g1/97-1 dated 28. 2. 1997, quash the same and directing the 2nd respondent to approve the petitioner's appointment from 2. 7. 1990 with all consequential service and monetary benefits.

(3.) W. P. No. 14450/1997: The 5th respondent in w. P. No. 4960/1997 is the writ petitioner in this Writ Petition. He was appointed as lecturer in Chemistry in 4th respondent college (the very same college where the writ petitioner in W. P. No. 4960/97 is working) on 2. 7. 1990. But his appointment was approved by the 3rd respondent/joint Director from the academic year 1993 to 1994 only, not from the date of his appointment. Therefore he sent a representation to the 2nd respondent-director citing the example of another lecturer in the Commerce Department in the very same college (writ petitioner in W. P. No. 4960/97), whose services have been regularised with monetary benefit from the date of his appointment. But the 2nd respondent by the impugned proceedings has not only turned down his request, but cancelled the orders passed earlier to the said lecturer in Commerce department regularising the services from the date of his appointment. This order dated 28. 2. 97 is the impugned order in both the writ petitions.