IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21.07.2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.No.14399 of 2009 & M.P.No.1 of 2009 1. T.S.Pandi 2. S.Anantharaj 3. T.Paramasivam 4. M.Nelson Christopher 5. M.Senthil Kumar 6. M.Arumugam ... Petitioners Versus 1. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Dept, Fort. St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Panagal Buildings, Saidapet, Chennai – 15. 3. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District. 4. The District Collector, Thoothukudi District. 5. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the proceedings of the first respondent in letter No.311584/E3/2008-3 dated 05.01.2009 and quash the same and direct the second respondent to appoint these petitioners as Road Inspector Grade-II with consequential benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Gangatharan For Respondents: Mrs.Lita Srinivasan Government Advocate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R The petitioners state that they were employed as Technical Assistant in various Panchayat Unions. They made representation dated 24.01.2008 to absorb them in the cadre of Road Inspector Grade – II/Overseer or any other equivalent post in the light of the order passed in W.P.(MD).Nos.11660 to 11668 of 2006, dated 09.05.2007. This Court passed an order directing the first respondent to pass orders on the representation of the petitioners within a period of two months. Pursuant to the same, the first respondent passed the impugned order dated 05.01.2009 rejecting the request of the petitioners to absorb them permanently in Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department in the cadre of Road Inspector Grade – II/Overseer or any other equivalent post, on the ground that they were not in service as on 15.12.2006. 2. The petitioners have now come up with the present writ petition to quash the aforesaid order dated 05.01.2009 of the first respondent and for a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioners as Road Inspector, Grade-II with consequential benefits. 3. Notice of motion was ordered on 27.07.2009. 4. The respondents filed counter affidavit. 5. Heard Mr.V.Gangatharan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.Lita Srinivasan, learned Government Advocate for the respondents. 6. The Government issued the G.O.Ms.No.93, Rural Development (C.3) Department dated 26.03.1997 specifically prohibiting the appointment of persons on daily wages by Panchayat Unions. Hence, the petitioners were not continued after 26.03.1997, pursuant to the aforesaid G.O. The petitioners made representation dated 24.01.2008 seeking absorption in the light of the order dated 09.05.2007 by this Court in W.P.(MD).Nos.11660 to 11668 of 2006. When no order was passed by the respondents, the petitioners filed W.P.No.8685 of 2008 batch seeking a direction to dispose of their representation. This Court on 30.09.2008 directed the first respondent to pass orders on the representation dated 24.01.2008 of the petitioners in the light of the order dated 09.05.2007 in W.P. (MD).Nos.11660 to 11668 of 2006. The first respondent passed the impugned order stating that since the petitioners were not employed as on 15.12.2006, they could not be considered for absorption. In this regard, the order dated 09.05.2007 in W.P.No.(MD).Nos.11660 to 11668 of 2006 is relevant and the same is extracted here-under:- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ "Taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, the claim of the petitioners who are working in the respondent department as NMRs on daily wage basis has to be considered for absorption in the regular time scale of post subject to condition that they must prove that they are working as on date of issue of G.O.(D)No.739, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (E3) Department dated 15.12.2006, in the respondent department and also they possess required qualification." In the aforesaid order, this Court directed the respondents therein to consider for absorption of those employes who were in service as on 15.12.2006. 7.Further, admittedly, the petitioners were not in service as on 15.12.2006. It is also stated in para 21 of the counter affidavit filed by the respondents that the post of Road Inspector Grade-II are not really required and the Government does not intend to fill the vacant post of Road Inspector Grade-II in various Districts. 8. In these circumstances, I do not find any infirmity in the impugned order dated 05.01.2009 passed by the first respondent 9. Hence, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed. r n s Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1. The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Depot, Fort. St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. The Commissioner of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Panagal Buildings, Saidapet, Chennai – 15. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3. The District Collector, Virudhunagar District. 4. The District Collector, Thoothukudi District. W.P.No.14399 of 2009 5. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District. + 1 cc to Government Pleader, SR No.53051 BVR(CO) SR/28.7.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/