IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :09.2.2009 C O R A M : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. CHANDRU W.P.No.31681 of 2006 (O.A.No.1316 of 1997) 1.S.Velammal 2.R.Padmavathy 3.M.Mehrunisa 4.D.Nachiyarammal 5.N.Chellammal 6.C.Indirani Chelin 7.M.Savitri 8.L.Mari 9.J.Rajeswari 10.K.Kasthuri 11.V.Navaneedham 12.P.Senthamarai 13.V.Agnesh 14.R.Kirubamani 15.M.Radhambal 16.K.Saroja 17.S.Annalammal 18.K.Valli 19.T.Pappa 20.M.Kasthuri 21.R.Annammal 22.K.Parvathi 23.M.Ammenabegam 24.A.Indirani 25.S.Saradha 26.V.Rani 27.V.N.Parvathi 28.V.Mariyammal 29.C.Loordhumary 30.P.Dhanalakshmi 31.P.Gowri 32.S.Sakunthala 33.Jayamani 34.K.Jayalakshmi 35.S.Gowri 36.W.Chottima Bee 37.S.Saroja 38.C.Rani 39.A.Madhina Bee https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 40.R.Lakshmi 41.S.Rani 42.L.Sulochana 43.M.Chandra 44.V.Murugammal 45.P.Pappa 46.P.Karthiyayini 47.M.Selvarani 48.R.Indrani 49.R.Pattammal 50.C.Vachala 51.M.Abdhabegam 52.K.Zamina Bee 53.G.Anandha Valli 54.S.Lakshmi 55.A.Mumtaj 56.M.Rukmani 57.A.Alamelu 58.A.Banumadhi 59.L.Ranjitham 60.M.alayamma 61.S.Amirtham 62.C.Muniyammal 63.A.Arokya Mari 64.M.Valli. 65.M.Anthoniyammal 66.K.Premavathi 67.N.Gowri 68.M.K.Andhoniyammal 69.D.Vachala Devi 70.G.Madhrilea 71.K.Pankajam 72.N.Sarojini 73.K.Chandra 74.G.Sakunthala 75.G.Mariyammal 76.R.Krishnaveni 77.N.Radha Bai 78.M.Vasuki 79.M.Padmavathi 80.L.Leela Bai 81.A.Lakshmi 82.K.Maha 83.K.M.Saroja 84.A.Muthamma 85.D.Dhayamani 86.M.Neela 87.K.Kanaga 88.M.Vasantha 89.S.Vasantha .. Petitioners https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Vs 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Department of Home, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai-8. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Armed Reserve Police, Commissioner's Office, Egmore, Madras-8. ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus as stated therein. For petitioners : Mr.V.Prakash, SC for M/s.Rama Priya For respondents : Mrs.Sneha, GA ***** O R D E R The 89 petitioners who are serving as female prison wardens/Police Ayahs in the various jails in Tamil Nadu filed O.A.No.1316 of 1997 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal seeking for the following reliefs as found in their original application:- (a) provide identity cards and badges; (b) provide uniforms, footwear and rain coats on par with that provided to women constables; (c) extend the facility of housing in the police quarters; (d) issue the necessary cards in order to facilitate them to purchase provisions from the police stores; (e) provide atleast one day's leave every week or 'weekly off' ; (f) provide with a comfortable rest room in their places of work; (g) not to either engage or permit them to be engaged in the houses of police officers to do menial work; (h) to pay funeral expenses to the legal heirs of the petitioners immediately following their death. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The grievance of the petitioners was that by G.O.Ms.No.2671, Home, dated 07.12.1988, they were made permanent as Police Ayahs. Even though they have been made permanent, they are not given various benefits which are extended to other government servants. It is also stated that in the matter of grant of leave there was discrimination and while the woman police constables are entitled for duty off once a week labelled as 'weekly off' there is no such facility extended to these persons. It was also stated that they have been denied ration cards to purchase provision from the police stores. The HRA that is paid to them was meager and they do not even have a waiting room in the places where they were supposed to work. Many times, they were made to work in the houses of police officers as slave labourers. Even when they die, the legal heirs are not provided with funeral expenses as provided to women constables. After sending a legal notice to the respondents, they have filed the original application before the Tribunal. 3. On notice from the Tribunal, on behalf of the first respondent State, a detailed reply affidavit dated 18.7.1997 has been filed. It was stated that for the notice sent to them, a reply dated 31.7.1996 was sent which was enclosed along with the reply affidavit. But it is seen from the records that no such reply has been annexed to the reply affidavit furnished to the Court. It is generally stated that they are not equal to the policemen in service and they do not belong to Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service. Therefore they cannot be given equal status. With reference to the identity cards, it is stated that since they belonged to the basic service, they do not require an identity card. Since the duties of the policeman are different from that of the police Ayahs, the denial of weekly off cannot be construed as discrimination. It is also stated that in respect of purchase of rations, only ministerial staff and the police personnel can buy provisions. Admission to the Ayah category will have to be done by the Committee. Though the Committee is defunct from 1995, but stores are still running. 4. In respect of the rest rooms in paragraph No.15 of the counter affidavit, it is averred as follows:- ''... it is submitted that the grievances in this paragraph is that the applicants lack of facilities in the rest room which offers no protection from the vagaries of weather. The respondent submits that action will be taken to bring basic amenities to the rest room provided to the applicants". 5. With reference to the allegation regarding sending them to work in the houses of police officers, the same was denied. It was pointed out that in respect of the specific allegation, a probe has been ordered and action will be initiated against them. It is also stated that if they also join the fund for grant of lumpsum amount of Rs.1 lakh as has been paid to the Government servants families, then https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in case of death amounts are advanced for funeral expenses. If any request is made for an instant grant, that may be done. In the light of the same, it was sought for the dismissal of the case of the petitioners. 6. On the abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this court and was re-numbered as W.P.No.31681 of 2006. 7. Mr.V.Prakash, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the contentions raised by the respondents are not genuine and liable to be rejected. Whether it is a police Ayah coming under the basic service or the other persons working under the subordinate service, there cannot be any difference in the matter of weekly off, and it is a universal right. Further, the reason for not granting identity cards or badges cannot be accepted on the basis of the service in which they are working. The learned counsel also referred to the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.21243 of 2006 dated 9.1.2007 wherein this court had granted several directions in respect of persons kept in the Central Prisons and other Sub-Jails in the State of Tamil Nadu. It was also implemented by the Additional Director General of Prisons vide his circular No.29324/CN/2/2006 dated 15.3.2006. By the said order, even the prisoners have been given identity cards, there is no reason why the petitioners cannot be granted identity cards. He also stated that benefits are extended to the prisoners only for the purpose of showing that there is humanitarian treatment in prisons and that the prisoners will get reformed. But in the case of petitioners though they were working either as female prison wardens or as police Ayahs, the same considerations are not extended. 8. The argument advanced by the respondents cannot be accepted. It is no doubt true that the service conditions cannot be uniform. But with reference to the basic issues the respondents will have to keep in mind the mandate of Article 43 of the Constitution, which provides for the conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of leisure. 9. Hence, it is directed that the respondents shall provide to the petitioners and other similarly placed persons within a period of three months the following amenities and facilities :- a) the police Ayahs or female prison wardens will be provided identity cards and badges. b) They will be provided uniform, footwear and raincoats on par with the women constables. c) they will be provided necessary ration cards to purchase provision from the police stores; d) they will be provided one day's leave every week or a weekly off for over six days' of work. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ e) to whichever place they are posted, they will be provided a comfortable rest room. 10. The writ petition is ordered in the above terms. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar js To 1. The Secretary, Department of Home, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2. The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai-8. 3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Armed Reserve Police, Commissioner's Office, Egmore, Madras-8. 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.5551 W.P.No.31681 of 2006 (O.A.No.1316 of 1997) SR(CO) SRA(6/03/2009) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/