1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 10.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD)No.691 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 The Commissioner, Tuticorin Municipality, Tuticorin. ...Appellant/Respondent Vs. D.Santhakumar ...Respondent/Petitioner Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.10849 of 2008 dated 08.06.2010. PRAYER IN WP(MD)No. 10849 of 2008: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling records pertaining to the impugned order dated: 9.9.2008 passed by the respondent herein in his proceedings in E2/3131/08, and quash the same consequently, dircting the respondent Municipality to permit the petitioner to Join Duty and regularize his servuice in the light of the order of this Honourable Court made in WP(MD)No. 13216 of 1998 dated: 12.2.2004. For Appellant : Mr.K.Mahendran, Spl.G.P. For Respondent : Mr.R.V.Rajkumar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH,J.) This Writ Appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)No.10849 of 2008 dated 08.06.2010, by which, a direction has been issued to the appellant/Municipality to consider the case of the respondent as a new recruit for any suitable post. The learned Single Judge further stated in the order that the respondent herein is not entitled for regularisation and not entitled to claim any backwages for past service. 2.It is seen that earlier a Writ petition was filed in W.P.No.13216 of 1998 by the respondent herein and four others. The said Writ petition was allowed with a direction to the appellant herein to regularise such services. Since the respondent herein has not approached the appellant for 4½ years, he was not regularised and thereafter, the respondent herein has filed the above said Writ petition. 3.Considering the case of the respondent, the learned Single Judge has passed the order directing the appellant to consider the respondent as a new recruit. Challenging the same, the present Writ Appeal has been filed. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4.Admittedly, the earlier Writ petition in W.P.No.13216 of 1998 was filed by the respondent and four others has been allowed and the respondent herein has filed the present Writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.10849 of 2008 claiming the benefit under the earlier order, which has become final between the parties. Considering the fact that the respondent has not approached the appellant in time, the learned Single Judge has granted a lesser relief to the respondent herein than that of the other four Writ petitioners. Therefore, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. However, the appellant shall consider the case of the respondent within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.is closed. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( CRL SIDE ) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR nbj TO: THE COMMISSIONER OF TUTICORIN MUNICIPALITY, TUTICORIN. 1CC TO MR. R.V. RAVIKUMAR, ADVOCATE, SR: 27056: DM:2011:AUGUST:24:: W.A.(MD)No.691 of 2011 10.08.2011 2P:3C:; https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/