R.KRISHNAMOORTHY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order dated 20.06.2014 is sought to be quashed in the present Writ Petition. Further, a direction is sought for to regularize the service of the writ petitioner.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner made a submission that the writ petitioner joined as Data Entry Operator in the Tiruchirapalli City Corporation and continuing in service. The writ petitioner was appointed during the year 2002. It is contended that the writ petitioner was serving for a considerable length of time as Data Entry Operator on temporary basis on consolidated pay salary. Thus, he is entitled to be regularised in the sanctioned post in the regular time scale of pay.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the writ petitioner states that the claim of the writ petitioner was accepted by the Corporation Council and the resolution was passed to that effect and accordingly, recommendations were submitted to the Government for appropriate approval. The said proposal recommending the case of the writ petitioner for grant of regularization in the sanctioned post was rejected by the Government in G.O.(D)No.331, dated 2.9.2014. The reasons stated in the Government Order is that no posts of Data Entry Operator is available in the service rules and no such post was sanctioned by the Government in the Corporation and therefore, the case of the writ petitioner cannot be considered for grant of regularization. In this regard, it is contended that the writ petitioner is fully qualified for appointment to the post of Data Entry Operator as well as to the other post including the post of Junior Assistant and therefore, he can be considered for regular absorption in the post of Junior Assistant or in any other suitable post.