IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated 9.2.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.34263 of 2006 R.Krishnan. ... Applicant -Vs.- 1.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Soil Conservation Scheme, Krishnagiri. 2.The Executive Engineer, Soil Conservation Scheme, Agriculture Engineering, Dharmapuri. 3.The Chief Engineer, Department of Agriculture Engineering, Nanthanam, Chennai. ... Respondents Original Application No.10381 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench praying to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent dated 1.6.92 issued in the Ref.No.E.1162/92 and quash the same so far as it relates to date of representation and further direct the respondents to regularise the service of the applicant with effect from 26.8.82 with all consequential benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition. For petitioner : Mr.K.Thennan For respondents : Mr.S.Sivashanmugam Government Advocate ----- O R D E R Original Application No.10381 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench praying to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent dated 1.6.92 issued in the Ref.No.E.1162/92 and quash the same so far as https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ it relates to date of representation and further direct the respondents to regularise the service of the applicant with effect from 26.8.82 with all consequential benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition. 2. The petitioner, aged 49 years at the time of filing the Original Application, was appointed as watchman in the Soil Conservation Project under the Agriculture Engineering Department, Hosure. He has filed the Original Application in the year 1998 seeking regularisation after putting in considerable years of service. Petitioner has made series of representations in the years 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996 and 1997. Failure to consider the aforesaid representations, the petitioner approached the Tribunal. At this point of time, learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has no instruction to state as to the present status of the petitioner. 3. In such view of the matter, if the grievance of the petitioner still subsists, the third respondent is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularisation and other relief as prayed for keeping in mind the G.O.Ms.No.462 Agriculture (AA.IV) Department dated 31.10.1996 issued in respect of similarly placed night watchmen under the very same Department. Petitioner is also permitted to make a fresh representation, if he so desires, within a month. The third respondent shall consider and dispose off the same on its own merits and in accordance with law within two months thereafter. The Writ Petition is disposed off accordingly. No costs. ts Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1.The Assistant Executive Engineer, Soil Conservation Scheme, Krishnagiri. 2.The Executive Engineer, Soil Conservation Scheme, Agriculture Engineering, Dharmapuri. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The Chief Engineer, Department of Agriculture Engineering, Nanthanam, Chennai. RK(CO) SR/19.2.2010 Order in W.P.No.34263 of 2006 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/