V UMAPATHY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the third respondent issued in Na. Ka. No. A1-1011/tam/98, dated 6. 5. 1999 and quash the same as illegal and direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners to that of time scale of pay, and pay the petitioners, the arrears of salary with effect from the date of their respective appointments. W. P. No. 3926 of 2001: this writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners from the date of their appointment in the respondent Corporation and pay them all attendant benefits. W. P. No. 7209 of 2004: this writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioners as per the orders of the Deputy Chief Inspector of Factories, IV Division, Chennai dated 7. 1. 2002.)Common Order: heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned.

(2.) SINCE the issues involved in the above writ petitions have arisen out of the same facts and circumstances, a common order is passed. The facts, in a nutshell, are as follows:

(3.) IT is stated that all the petitioners are employed with the Tamil Nadu Medicinal Plant Farms and Herbal Medicine Corporation Ltd. , (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation"), on daily wages and they have been continuously working as casual labourers for many years, without any break in service. The Corporation is a public sector undertaking of the Government of Tamil Nadu and it is engaged, interalia, in the manufacturing of hair oil, herbal facial creams and other herbal medicines. In spite of several representations having been made on behalf of the petitioners, both by the individual employees and by the employees unions, casual labourers, like the petitioners, were not regularized in service. Therefore, several writ petitions had been filed before this Court, at various stages, with regard to the regularisation of the casual labourers, who were employed by the Corporation, on daily wages. Thereafter, some of the casual labourers had been regularized in service under the time scale of pay. However, the regularisation had not been done from their initial dates of appointments in the service of the Corporation. Further, they have not been paid the salary due to them, in accordance with G. O. Ms. No. 162, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 13. 4. 1998. In some cases, it has been found that there were certain discrepancies and anomalies in the fixation of pay scales.