STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. FATHIMA MARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this Intra Court Appeal is to the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 03.10.2012 made in WP No.2173 of 2003, in and by which, a Writ of Mandamus was issued directing the 3rd respondent to regularise the services of the 1st respondent as Udanal/Attendant , in pursuance of the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.267 dated 22.12.1999.

(2.) The 1st respondent herein had moved this Court seeking the aforesaid relief, claiming that her husband Mr.Raju who was in service in the Indian Army died on 17.06.1986, leaving behind herself and three children. Impelled by the necessity to eke out livelihood, the 1st respondent sought employment in the Rural Ayurvedic Dispensary, at Sarugani with the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, Devakottai at Sivagangai District. Subsequently, the 1st respondent s name was also sponsored by the Employment Exchange and ultimately she was appointed as Udanal/Attendant in the Rural Ayurvedic Dispensary, based on the resolution passed by the Panchayat Union Appointments Committee, the 1st respondent joined the duty on 22.12.1989, on a consolidated salary of Rs.750/- per month. The 1st appellant issued a Government Order in G.O.Ms. No.267 dated 22.12.1999 empowering the 3rd appellant to regularize those persons who were appointed after 01.04.1981 due to emergency and necessity, subject to certain conditions.

(3.) The further claim of the 1st respondent is that the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, Devakottai ought to have included her name for regularization, however, the same was not done for the reasons best known to the Commissioner Panchayat Union, Devakottai. In the meantime, the 1st appellant had issued another Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.161 dated 26.06.2000, regularising the services of the employees, who were appointed under consolidated salary after 01.04.1981. The services of the 1st respondent were not regularized because of the failure on the part of the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, Devakottai to recommend her name for regularization. It appears that the respondent had made a representation to the Commissioner, Panchayat Union, Devakottai, seeking regularisation accepting the said request, the Commissioner Panchayat Union, Devakottai by its letter dated 19.09.2000 addressed to the 3rd appellant recommended regularization of the services of the respondent.