EDMOND CHELLAIAH Vs. CHIEF SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition is filed for issuance of a Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the proceedings made in Lr.No.8993/F2/09-1 dated 29.07.2009 passed by the Deputy Secretary, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, Chennai, and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to consider and treat the period from 02.02.2001 to 19.07.2007 as a period of service rendered for the purpose of calculation of eligibility of pensionary and other service benefits to the petitioners.

(2.) The facts and briefs are that the petitioners were appointed as Mazdoor in various departments in Secretariat between 1987 to 1991. The appointments were purely on casual basis and without the name being sponsored by employment exchange. The Government issued an order vide a letter No. 13840/89-8, dated 05.03.1991 stating that mazdoors on daily wages should be recruited only through employment exchange and mazdoors who were recruited without sponsor from the employment exchange should be replaced by such of those candidates sponsored through employment exchange. The said letter contains the following instructions:-

(3.) This letter was challenged in O.A.No.846 and 847 of 1991 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. The Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal by an order dated 12.05.1992, directed that those person who have completed 240 days of work on casual basis during the period shall kept on the rolls may be continued subject to the eventual appointment against vacancies arising in the service. The Tribunal was of the opinion that having allowed such persons to continue on the rolls of casual workers it would be unfair to dispense with the service. In compliance of the said order, the Government passed the G.O.Ms.No.398, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (Personnel) Department, dated 18.12.1992 by giving appointment to 162 persons. The Government passed the following orders in the said G.O.Ms.No.398:-