IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Date: 02.08.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE THIRU JUSTICE V. PARTHIBAN W.P.Nos.28666 to 28669 of 2014 & M.P.Nos.1 to 3 of 2014 R.Thimmaraji .. Petitioner in W.P.No.28666 of 2014 A.Murugan .. Petitioner in W.P.No.28667 of 2014 S.Sivamuthu .. Petitioner in W.P.No.28668 of 2014 versus
1. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
2. The Chief Engineer Personnel, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
3. The Superintending Engineer, Krishnagiri Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Krishnagiri-2.
4. The Superintending Engineer, Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Dharmapuri-5.
5. Mr.P.Thangaraj
6. Mrs.J.Meena
7. Mr.S.Mathiazhagan .. Respondents in all the W.Ps.
Prayer in W.P.Nos.28666 & 28667 of 2014: These Writ Petitions are filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for all the records pursuant to the impugned orders passed by the 2nd respondent made in (Per) FB TANGEDCO proceedings No.22 dated 25.10.2012 insofar as Sl.No.III(7) in the annexure to the said Board Proceedings is concerned and the consequential impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Lr.No.009725/597/Adm.1/A.1/F. W.P.Nos.17440, 16099 & /08/2014 dated 11.09.2014, quash the same as null and void, illegal, discriminatory without jurisdiction and non application of mind and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 4 to appoint the petitioners to the post of Mazdoor with effect from 25.10.2012 with all attendant benefits.
Prayer in W.P.No.28668 of 2014: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for all the records pursuant to the impugned orders passed by the 2nd respondent made in (Per) FB TANGEDCO proceedings No.22 dated 25.10.2012 insofar as Sl.No.III(7) in the annexure to the said Board Proceedings is concerned and quash the same as null and void, illegal, discriminatory without jurisdiction and non application of mind and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 4 to appoint the petitioner to the post of Mazdoor with effect from 25.10.2012 with all attendant benefits.
For petitioner : Mr.N.G.R.Prasad For respondents : Mr.T.M.Pappiah, Spl.G.P.
COMMON ORDER The present writ petitions have been filed, seeking for the following relief:
W.P.Nos.28666 & 28667 of 2014:
"To call for all the records pursuant to the impugned orders passed by the 2nd respondent made in (Per) FB TANGEDCO proceedings No.22 dated 25.10.2012 insofar as Sl.No.III(7) in the annexure to the said Board Proceedings is concerned and the consequential impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent vide Lr.No.009725/597/ Adm.1/A.1/F. W.P.Nos.17440, 16099 & /08/2014 dated 11.09.2014, quash the same as null and void, illegal, discriminatory without jurisdiction and non application of mind and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 4 to appoint the petitioners to the post of Mazdoor with effect from 25.10.2012 with all attendant benefits.
W.P.No.28668 of 2014:
"To call for all the records pursuant to the impugned orders passed by the 2nd respondent made in (Per) FB TANGEDCO proceedings No.22 dated 25.10.2012 insofar as Sl.No.III(7) in the annexure to the said Board Proceedings is concerned and quash the same as null and void, illegal, discriminatory without jurisdiction and non application of mind and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 4 to appoint the petitioner to the post of Mazdoor with effect from 25.10.2012 with all attendant benefits.
2. Since common facts, issues and grounds raised in these writ petitions, they are taken up together and being disposed of by this common order.
3. The brief facts of the case of the petitioners, are as follows:
3.1. The petitioners in all the Writ Petitions, have joined the first respondent Corporation as contract workers on various dates between 1999 and 2002 and have been working as such since the date of their original appointment. By Board Proceedings in B.P.No.9, dated 9.1.2008, a scheme was framed for regularization of contract labourers who were not covered by 12(3) settlement, but left out for payment of ex gratia. For the purpose of absorption and regularization, a Committee has been constituted in order to undertake individual verification for recommending regularization/absorption of the workers employed under contract labour. The Committee consisted of Member (Accounts), Member (Distribution), Secretary, Chief Engineer/Personnel and Senior Personnel Officer/Labour.
3.2. All the petitioners herein were employed as contract labourers in Krishnagiri Division and in response to the Board Proceedings, the fourth respondent in whose jurisdiction, the petitioners had been employed, had sent a letter dated 4.3.2008 with particulars of 17 contract workmen of engaged at Krishnagiri Division, in the prescribed format. The names of two of the writ petitioners herein, namely, R.Thimmaraji and A.Murugan were figured in the said letter addressed by the 4th respondent. However, no action was forthcoming in regard to their absorption. In the above circumstances, the said individuals have approached this Court in W.P.Nos.17440 and 16099 of 2008 claiming the relief of absorption in view of they being identified as one the contract labourers eligible for absorption. This Court vide order dated 23.07.2008, disposed of the writ petitions by directing the respondents therein to consider the claim of the writ petitioners for absorption. The operative portion of the direction passed by this Court in the above said writ petitions is extracted herein below:
"Since the petitioners' names already find place in the contract labourers identification list at Sl.No.106 & 107, the second respondent is directed to consider the representation of the petitioners dated 16.6.2008 for absorption in accordance with law and pass orders there on within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order."
3.3. Thereafter, the Board has issued further proceedings, vide B.P.No.22 dated 25.10.2012 absorbing more than 4000 contract workmen in the post of Mazdoor (Trainee) out of which, 171 persons were appointed from Dharmapuri Circle in which Krishnagiri Section is also attached, where, the petitioners herein were working. However, unfortunately, the petitioners were excluded from being considered for absorption.
3.4. While the matters stood thus, in respect of two writ petitioners, namely, R.Thimmaraji and A.Murugan, rejection order dated 11.09.2014 has been issued rejecting the claim of the petitioners. The said order is purported to have been issued in pursuant to the direction passed by this Court as early as in 2008. The decision of the Board declining to entertain the claim of the petitioners is under challenge before this Court in the present writ petitions.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, at the out set, would submit that the rejection of the petitioners' claim vide order dated 11.9.2014 by the 3rd respondent, cannot be sustained in law since he is not the competent authority to take a decision in the matter of absorption of contract labourers as per the regularization scheme framed by the Board vide proceedings in B.P.No.9 dated 9.1.2008 and further proceedings in B.P.No.22 dated 25.10.2012. It is the Committee which was constituted under the Board Proceedings No.9 dated 9.1.2008 is competent to verify the claims of the contract employees and the said Committee alone can take a final call in the matter towards the claims of the petitioners for absorption in the Corporation.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioners would also submit that as regards the petitioners, R.Thimmaraji and A.Murugan are concerned, their names have already been identified and recommended vide proceedings of the Executive Engineer, O&M, Krishnagiri, dated 25.3.2008 which proceedings were addressed to the 3rd respondent and the copy of said proceedings were filed the typed set of papers at page Nos.7 to 10.
6. As regards 3rd petitioner, namely, Sivamuthu is concerned, the learned counsel would draw the attention of this Court that the authorities themselves have issued several certificates certifying that he was employed as a contract labourer from 2002 onwards. This fact has not been seriously disputed by the respondents. Although a detailed counter statements have been filed in all three writ petitions, however, no acceptable reasons have been set forth in any of counter affidavits as to why the claim of the writ petitioners cannot be considered positively by the competent authority. As rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that 3rd respondent is not competent authority to decide the issue of absorption of the contract labourers since a special Committee has been constituted by the Board vide proceedings in B.P.No.9 dated 9.1.2008 and the said Committee alone is empowered to make recommendations on the basis of certain guidelines issued by the Board Proceedings, as rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the rejection order passed by the 3rd respondent has to be necessarily interfered with as being unsustainable.
7. As regards Board proceedings in B.P.No.22 dated 25.10.12 in Annexure, insofar as Sl.No.III (7) is concerned, it did not include the names of the petitioners without proper consideration of the claims of the petitioners by the competent authority, the same is also to be necessarily interfered with.
8. In all the above circumstances, the impugned proceedings and the rejection order passed by the 3rd respondent dated 11.09.2014 are set aside. The matter is remanded back to the first respondent for fresh consideration and the claims of the petitioners have to be placed before the Committee constituted under B.P.No.9, dated 9.1.2008. The respondents are directed to pass final orders in respect of the claims of the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
9. With the above direction, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.
suk 02.08.2017 To
1. The Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
2. The Chief Engineer Personnel, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
3. The Superintending Engineer, Krishnagiri Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Krishnagiri-2.
4. The Superintending Engineer, Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Dharmapuri-5.
V.PARTHIBAN, J.
suk W.P.Nos.28666 to 28668 of 2014 02.08.2017