R.DEVENDRAN Vs. PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have filed these Writ Petitions praying for issuance of Writs of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records relating to ROC.No.859/A/2019, dated 18.01.2019 and ROC.No.4804/A/2019, dated 02.04.2019 on the file of the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioners with all attendant benefits.

(2.) The respondent called for applications to fill up the post of Record Clerk through direct recruitment. The petitioners have applied for the same through e-Court web-site. They have participated in the written test and after passing the written test, interview was held on 23.04.2018 and after that, the petitioners have been provisionally selected in the rotation of MBC & DC (Priority)/GT (priority) respectively and Certificate verification was conducted on 08.05.2019. Thereafter, the petitioners have been appointed as Record Clerks temporarily under Tamil Nadu Judicial Ministerial Service (TNJMS) by the respondent by proceedings in R.O.C.No.6584/A/2018, dated 24.05.2018. The petitioners have joined the service on 25.05.2018 as Record Clerks in the Principal District Court, Namakkal.

(3.) The petitioners have been working as Record Clerks without any blemish. While they were working as Record Clerks, suddenly the respondent issued proceedings in R.O.C.No.859/A/2019, dated 18.01.2019 stating that their appointment made by direct recruitment, was modified and be considered temporary as per Section 17(1) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, which according to the petitioners is erroneous and they have been ousted from regular service on 21.01.2019 with break in service for one day on 22.01.2019 and re-appointed in the same post as Record Clerk (temporarily) on 23.01.2019. Thereafter, the respondent, by proceedings in R.O.C.No.4804/A/2019, dated 02.04.2019, ousted the petitioners from service without assigning any reasons, which according to the petitioner is wrong. Challenging both the above proceedings dated 18.01.2019 and 02.04.2019, the petitioners have preferred the present Writ Petitions for the relief stated supra.