IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 12.10.2007 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE CHITRA VENKATARAMAN W.A.Nos.894 and 920 to 922 of 2007, W.P.Nos.10788, 10794, 12880, 16902, 16943 to 16946, 16962, 18002, 18847, 20287, 20811 to 20814, 21576 to 21581, 22259, 22672, 22683, 22755, 23009, 23325, 24690, 24728, 24743, 24895 to 24903, 24952, 24961, 24980, 25217, 25256, 25257, 25903, 26131, 26148, 26332, 26519, 26531 to 26535, 26567,26660, 26789, 26866, 26941, 26962 to 26967, 27040 to 27049, 27220 to 27230, 27271, 27288, 27289, 27292 to 27297, 27449, 27486, 27513, 27724, 27758, 27966, 28469, 28692, 28956, 29050, 29480, 29689 to 29692 and 30488 of 2007 and M.P.Nos.1 of 2007 and M.P.Nos.2 of 2007 Mr.R.Francis Appellants in WA 894/07 Mr.K.Kumaran Appellants in WA 920/07 Mr.A.Michael Thasan Appellants in WA 921/07 Mr.M.Mariadhas Appellants in WA 922/07 Mr.S.Mohan Babu Petitioner in WP 10788/07 Mr.A.Durai Petitioner in WP 10794/07 M.K.Rajendran Petitioner in WP 12880/07 V.Rathinam Petitioner in WP 16902/07 D.Kathiravan Petitioner in WP 16943/07 K.Krishnan Petitioner in WP 16944/07 P.Periyasamy Petitioner in WP 16945/07 M.Subramanian Petitioner in WP 16946/07 Jayakumar Petitioner in WP 16962/07 J.Victor Sundararaj Petitioner in WP 18002/07 M.D.Ramesh Petitioner in WP 18847/07 R.Sankar Petitioner in WP 20287/07 E.Durai Petitioner in WP 20811/07 G.Munirathinam Petitioner in WP 20812/07 P.Vellaiyappan Petitioner in WP 20813/07 M.Thangaraj Petitioner in WP 20814/07 P.Sathiyamoorthy Petitioner in WP 21576/07 P.Muniraj Petitioner in WP 21577/07 A.Yesantha Rao Petitioner in WP 21578/07 C.Muugan Petitioner in WP 21579/07 G.Jothiappan Petitioner in WP 21580/07 T.Selvam Petitioner in WP 21581/07 K.Rajendran Petitioner in WP 22259/07 C.Mories Petitioner in WP 22672/07 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ G.Kumar Petitioner in WP 22683/07 a.R.Ayyasamy Petitioner in WP 22755/07 K.Ramachandran Petitioner in WP 23009/07 Ponnusamy Petitioner in WP 23325/07 K.B.Vignesh A.Babu G.Harikrishnan S.Vijay R.Kumaran M.Bawankumar V.Nethaji P.Senehu Ramulu V.Parameswaran R.Immanuvel P.S.Murugan N.Ezhilarasan H.A.Sirajitheen V.Saravanan R.Nesamani Petitioner in WP.24690/07 K.K.Kadarmasthan K.Ramesh A.Anandan P.Kannan J.Devadoss G.Saravanakumar S.Narasimhan C.Umapathy R.Venkatesan A.Ezhil G.Arumugam P.Parthiban K.Chandru R.Veeramani P.Gopalakrihsnan K.Manoharakumar K.Sudhakar M.Pandiayan S.Venkateshbabu P.Babijohn G.Neelamegam L.Selvakumar G.Marisamy P.Sathivel K.Sivakumar M.Ramesh G.Kennady G.Mohanakrishnan S.Velmurugan R.Nakesh https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ S.Murugan A.Delhi D.Selvam L.Senthilmurugan p.Anand J.Alishakmeeran Petitioners in WP.24690/07 T.Senthil D.Gunasekaran E.Senthil S.Senthur Pandian E.Palani R.Rajan K.Ramalingam V.Kamalakannan N.Sundaramurthy R.Padmanabhan K.Gunaventhan M.Karthikeyan R.Srinivasan L.Suresh A.Baskar B.Viji L.Paramasivan P.Amutharaj R.Kumar J.Chitrarasu N.Sakthivel T.Selvam P.Suresh K.Ananthakumar D.Thanikachalam Petitioners in WP.24728/07 C.Govindaraj A.Ezhilarasu B.Prabhu P.Elumalai M.Muthu K.Pichai T.S.Sathiskumar P.Ragunathan V.Babuji M.Karunanithi P.Vadivel R.Natarajan M.Paranthaman S.R.Edwin Pawlraj P.Sivakumar S.Palani S.Palanirajan A.Jothiraj https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ R.K.Gunasekar K.Rajkumar M.Saravanan M.Nandakumar D.Ramesh S.Harishkumar Kajamohideen L.Madhavan Petitioner in WP.24743/07 S.Ravichandran Petitioner in WP.24895/07 M.Sampath Kumar Petitioner in WP.24896/07 R.Balusamy Petitioner in WP.24897/07 K.Palanisamy Petitioner in WP.24898/07 V.Anbalagan Petitioner in WP.24899/07 C.Periyasamy Petitioner in WP.24900/07 C.Dhachinamoorthy Petitioner in WP.24901/07 D.Palanisamy Petitioner in WP.24902/07 P.Subramaniam Petitioner in WP.24903/07 TamilNadu Arasu Pokkavarathu Kazhaga Thozhilalar Nala Sangam rep by its president A.Yogannan Petitioner in WP.24952/07 K.Kesavan Petitioner in WP.24961/07 M.Selvam Petitioner in WP.24980/07 E.Kathiravan Petitioner in WP.25217/07 R.Selladurai Petitioner in WP.25256/07 V.Shankar Ram Petitioner in WP.25257/07 V.Murugesan Petitioner in WP.25903/07 V.P.Karthi Petitioner in WP.26131/07 K.Ramesh Petitioner in WP.26148/07 R.Kumaresan Petitioner in WP.26332/07 R.Palanivelu Petitioner in WP.26519/07 D.Nagaraj Petitioner in WP.26531/07 J. Kesavan ... Petitioner in W.P.26532 of 2007 T. Gopal raj ... Petitioner in W.P.26533 of 2007 E. Arunachalam ... Petitioner in W.P.26534 of 2007 T. Albetterrin ... Petitioner in W.P.26535 of 2007 J. Edwin Premraj ... Petitioner in W.P.26567 of 2007 M. Subramani ... Petitioner in W.P.26660 of 2007 Tamilnadu Arasu Pokkuvarathu Thozhilalar Sangam Regd.No.736 Mdu Rep by its General Secretary Dindigul. ... Petitioner in W.P.26789 of 2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ State Transport Employee's union Regd.No.73/MDS Rep by its General Secretary No.7 Pallavan Salai, Chennai-2 ... Petitioner in W.P.26866 of 2007 V. Saravanavelu ... Petitioner in W.P.26941 of 2007 T. Mohan ... Petitioner in W.P.26962 of 2007 P. Natarajan ... Petitioner in W.P.26963 of 2007 P.S. Marimuthu ... Petitioner in W.P.26964 of 2007 A. Sivasubramanian ... Petitioner in W.P.26965 of 2007 R. Sekar ... Petitioner in W.P.26966 of 2007 K. Arumugam ... Petitioner in W.P.26967 of 2007 A. Muniraj ... Petitioner in W.P.27040 of 2007 Siva Narayanan ... Petitioner in W.P.27041 of 2007 A. Arumugam ... Petitioner in W.P.27042 of 2007 G. Murugan ... Petitioner in W.P.27043 of 2007 M. Elangovan ... Petitioner in W.P.27044 of 2007 A. Kathiresan ... Petitioner in W.P.27045 of 2007 G. Sivakumar ... Petitioner in W.P.27046 of 2007 G. Krishnasamy ... Petitioner in W.P.27047 of 2007 K. Ramesh ... Petitioner in W.P.27048 of 2007 T. Lakshmanan ... Petitioner in W.P.27049 of 2007 M. Ramaraj ... Petitioner in W.P.27220 of 2007 S. Karnan ... Petitioner in W.P.27221 of 2007 S. Sundarajan ... Petitioner in W.P.27222 of 2007 M. Manimaran ... Petitioner in W.P.27223 of 2007 N. Palaniswamy ... Petitioner in W.P.27224 of 2007 G. Sekar ... Petitioner in W.P.27225 of 2007 A. George Manuel ... Petitioner in W.P.27226 of 2007 N. Natrayan ... Petitioner in W.P.27227 of 2007 S. Murugesan ... Petitioner in W.P.27228 of 2007 S. Muruganandhan ... Petitioner in W.P.27229 of 2007 T. Marimuthu ... Petitioner in W.P.27230 of 2007 A. Thirumoorthy ... Petitioner in W.P.27271 of 2007 M. Natrajan ... Petitioner in W.P.27288 of 2007 S. Chandrasekaran ... Petitioner in W.P.27289 of 2007 A. Thangavel ... Petitioner in W.P.27292 of 2007 S.R. Devaraj ... Petitioner in W.P.27293 of 2007 T. Jayakumar ... Petitioner in W.P.27294 of 2007 M. Balusamy ... Petitioner in W.P.27295 of 2007 M. Kannan ... Petitioner in W.P.27296 of 2007 C. Kalaivanan ... Petitioner in W.P.27297 of 2007 E.A. Vadivel D. Damodaran B. Roopkumar P. Balasubramanian V. Sriman https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ S. Jayakrishnan M. Senthilkumar S. Baskaran G. Rakkappan C. Ramesh J. Udayachandran M. Rajasekar K. Ragupathy V. Jayaraj ... Petitioner in W.P.27449 of 2007 M.Veeramani ... Petitioner in W.P.27486 of 2007 C. Muthukumar ... Petitioner in W.P.27513 of 2007 State Transport Employees union Regd.No.73/Mds Rep by its General Secretary No.7 Pallavan Salai, Chennai-2 ... Petitioner in W.P.27724 of 2007 A. Ramadas ... Petitioner in W.P.27758 of 2007 C.Chenniappan ... Petitioner in W.P.27966 of 2007 S. Elumalai ... Petitioner in W.P.28469 of 2007 V. Srinivasan ... Petitioner in W.P.28692 of 2007 N. Pazhanivel ... Petitioner in W.P.28956 of 2007 K. Dhommappan ... Petitioner in W.P.29050 of 2007 T. Balasubramanian ... Petitioner in W.P.29480 of 2007 S. Prakash ... Petitioner in W.P.29689 of 2007 B. Arumugam ... Petitioner in W.P.29690 of 2007 K. Vijayakumar ... Petitioner in W.P.29691 of 2007 E.P. Balasubramaniam ... Petitioner in W.P.29692 of 2007 Kovai arasu Pokkuvarathu Oozhiyar Sangam rep by its General Secretary Coimbatore- 641 009. ... Petitioner in W.P.30488 of 2007 The Government of Tamilnadu rep by its Secretary Transport Department Fort St. George, Chennai-9 ... Ist Respondent in W.A.No.894/07,W.A 920/07, 921/07, 922/07, W.P.18847/07, 22672/07, W.P.24728/07, 24952/07, 26519/07, 26531/07 to 26535/07, 26789/07, 26866/07, 27288 and 27289/07, 27449/07, 27513/07, 27724/07, 28956/07, 29689 to 29692 of 2007 and 30488/07. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The Government of Tamilnadu Rep by its Secretary Labour Employment (Nz) Department Fort St. George, Chennai-9. ... Ist Respondent in W.P.21576/07 to 21581/07 W.P.16962/07, 20567/07 The management of Metropolitan Transport Corporation (Chennai Ltd) Pallavan Salai Chennai 2. ...2nd respondent in WA.No.894/07, 18847/07, 22672/07, 23009/07, 24690/07, 24728/07, 26519/07, 26531/07 to 26535/07, 26866/07, 27449/07, 27513/07, 27724/07 ...1st Respondent in WP.10788/07 10794/07, 12880/07, 20287/07, 20811 to 20814/07, 22259/07, 22683/07, 24743/07, 24961, 24980/07, 25217/07, 26148/07, 26941/07. 3rd Respondent in WP.26567/07 Respondent in WP.No.28692/07 The Management of Tamil Nadu, State Transport Corporation, Rep by its Managing Director, Division III Madurai, Madurai. ...2nd Respondent in WA.920/07 and WA.921/07 The Management of Tamil Nadu, State Transport Corporation, Rep by its Managing Director, Division II, Wannarpet, Tirunelveli District. ...2nd Respondent in WA.922/07 The General Manager, The State Transport Corporation, (Madurai) Ltd, Nagercoil, Kaanyakumari District. ...3rd Respondent in WA.920 & 921/07 Tamil Nadu State Tranport Corporation Ltd, (Coimbatore Division II) rep by its Managing Director, Chennimalai Road, Erode District at Erode. ...1st Respondent in WP.16902/07, 16943/07, 16946/07, 18002/07, 22755/07, 23325/07, 24895/07 to 24903/07, 25256/07, 25257/07, 25903/07, 26962 to 26967/07, 27292 to 27297/07, 27486/07, 27966/07 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., rep by Managing Director, 37, Mettupalayam Road Coimbatore ...1st Respondent in WP.27040 to 27049/07, WP.27220 to 27230/07, 27271/07 2nd Respondent in WP.No.30488/07 Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Coimbatore Ltd, Erode Divisional Officer, rep by its General Managing, Senniamalai Road, Erode 1. ...2nd Respondent in WP.22755/07 23325/07, 25903/07, 27486/07, 27966/07 The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Mettupalayam Road, Coimbatore ...2nd Respondent in WP.27271/07 29689 to 29692 of 2007, 30488/07 The Assistant Director, Employment Exchange, Villupuram District. 2nd Respondent in WP.16962/07 The Tamilnadu Transport Corporation, (Villupuram Kottam I), Ltd., rep. by The Managing Director, Villupuram District. 3rd Respondent in WP.16962/07, 29050/07. Ist Respondent in WP.26332/07 2nd Respondent in WP.28956/07 The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Employment Exchange, Chennai - 600032. 2nd Respondent in WP.21576/07 to 21581, 26567/07. The Managing Director, TNSTC Salem Division, Salem. 3rd Respondent in WP.21576/07 to 21581/07, 24952/07 1st Respondent in WP.26660/07 The General Manager, TNSTC, Salem Division - II, Salem Main Raod, Bharathipuram, Dharmapuri - 5. 4th Respondent in WP.21576/07 to 21581/07. 2nd Respondent in WP.26660/07 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ The District Employment Exchange Officer, Dharmapuri District, Dharmapuri. 5th Respondent in WP.21576/07 to 21581/07. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Kovai Ltd., Coimbatore - 43. 1st Respondent in WP.26131/07 The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Erode, Erode District. 2nd Respondent in WP.26131/07. State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd., Dindigul Region, rep. by its Managing Director, Dindigul. 2nd Respondent in WP.26789/07 Assistant Labour Commissioner, Office of the Joint Commissioner of Labour, Dindigul, Tamil Nadu. 3rd Respondent in WP.26789/07, Labour Office - 2, Kuralagam, Chennai - 108. 3rd Respondent in WP.26866/07, 27724/07. The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, (Kumbakonam Division- I) Ltd., Kumbakonam - 612001. 2nd Respondent in WP.27288/07 & 27289/07. The Superintendent, Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Tondiarpet Depot, II, Chennai - 81. 3rd Respondent in WP.27513/07 The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation, Kanchipuram District. 1st Respondent in WP.27758/07. The Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, Rep. by its General Manager, Villupuram. 1st Respondent in WP.28469/07. The Branch Manager, Tamil Nadu Transport Corporation, Kalpakkam, Kancheepuram District. 2nd Respondent in WP.27758/07. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Department of Industries and Commerce, Fort St. George, Chennai -9. 1st Respondent in WP.29050/07 Electronic Corporation of Tamilnadu Ltd., rep. by its Managing Director, 735, Anna Salai, Chennai - 2. 2nd Respondent in WP.29050/07 Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., (Salem Division I) rep. by its Managing Director, Ramakrishna Road, Salem - 7. Respondent in WP.29480/07 The Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Office of the Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Coimbatore. 4th Respondent in WP.30488/07 For Appellant : Mr.N.G.R.Prasad for Mr.S.T.Varadarajulu and in W.A.No.894/2007 Mr.P.Ganesha Murthy & for Petitioner in W.P.NOs.26519, 26531 to 26535 and 27449 of 2007 For Appellant : Mr.N.G.R.Prasad for Mr.I.David Singh and in W.A.Nos.920 to Mr.S.Parthasarathy 922 of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.K.Thilageswaran in W.P.No.27758 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.P.Sakthivel in W.P.No.27966 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Ms.R.Vaigai in W.P.No.24743, 26789,26866 and 27724 Of 2007 For Petitioner : M/s.Row & Reddy in W.P.No.24728 Of 2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner : Ms.S.Sripriya in W.P.Nos.27486, 27271 and 29050 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.W.W.Abdul Majeed in W.P.No.27288 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Ms.D.Nagasaila in W.P.Nos.10788, 10794, 20287, 20811 to 20814, 22259, 22683, 23009, 24961, 24980, 25217 and 26941 of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.D.Hariparanthaman in W.P.Nos.24690, 26962 to 26967, 27040 to 27049, 27220 to 27230, 27292 to 27297 and 30488 of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.P.S.Kothandaraman in W.P.No.26660 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kingston Jerold in W.P.No.26567 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.V.Raghavachari in W.P.No.26332 and 27513 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Ms.P.Malliga in W.P.No.25903 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.K.Premkumar in W.P.Nos.16902, 16943 to 16946 and 18002 of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.H.S.Mohamed Rafi in W.P.Nos.22755 and 23325 of 2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner : Mr.M.M.Sundresh in W.P.Nos.24895 to 24903, 25256 and 25257 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.R.N.Amarnath in W.P.No.18847 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ajmal Raj in W.P.No.24952 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prakasam in W.P.No.26131 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.N.Subramani in W.P.No.16962 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Ms.Sudha Ramalingam in W.P.Nos.12880 and Mr.R.Venkatesh and 26148 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.R.Subramanian in W.P.Nos.21576 to 21581 of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.G.J.Baskar Narayanan in W.P.No.28692 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.V.Thirupathi in W.P.No.29480 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.S.Pakiraj in W.P.No.22672 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.P.V.S.Giridhar Associates in W.P.No.28469 Of 2007 For Petitioner : Mr.S.Senthilnathan in W.P.No.28956 Of 2007 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Petitioner : Mr.K.Gandhikumar in W.P.No.29689 Of 2007 For Respondents : Mr.R.Vidudalai, in all W.As and Advocate General W.Ps assisted by Mr.G.Sankaran Spl.Govt.Pleader JUDGMENT K.RAVIRAJA PANDIAN,J. The writ appeal in W.A.Nos.894 and 920 to 922 of 2007 are filed praying to set aside the order of the learned single Judge dated 25.4.2007 made in W.P.12727 of 2007 and the order dated 24.4.2007 made in W.P.Nos.11455 to 11457 of 2007 reported in (2007) 3 MLJ 233 respectively. 2. In the batch of writ petitions, one set of writ petitions are filed by persons, who were already disengaged by the respondent Corporation for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent Corporation to re-employ them by giving preference over the other persons as per Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act and other set of writ petitions are filed by persons still in service seeking for a mandamus directing the respondent Corporation not to terminate them and for further direction to appoint them in the permanent vacancies as drivers/conductors before appointing any other persons from the open market, as per Section25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act. 3. Mr.N.G.R.Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant and some of the petitioners spearheaded the arguments, made submissions in common questioning the order of the learned single Judge, which is the subject matter of the writ appeals in W.A.Nos.920 to 922 of 2007 and with reference to W.P.No.24728 of 2007. Ms.Vaigai, learned counsel for some of the petitioners supplemented the argument of Mr.Prasad by advancing argument with reference to W.P.Nos.24743 and 24744 of 2007. Mr.Hariparanthaman and Ms.Nagasaila, learned counsel for some of the writ petitioners seeking similar relief adopted the arguments of Mr.Prasad and Ms.Vaigai. 4. Before adverting to the arguments advanced, the factual matrix, which are almost similar in all cases except the relief sought for as stated above are to be stated as under: 5. W.A.Nos.920 to 922 of 2007 are filed against the common order dated 24.4.2007 in W.P.Nos.11455 to 11457 of 2007, which was followed for rejecting the writ petition No.12727 of 2007 by reason of the order dated 25.4.2007, which is the subject matter of W.A.No.894 of 2007. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ In W.P.No.11455 of 2007, the claim of the petitioner was that he was working as driver with the second respondent Corporation from 2.6.2005 onwards on casual appointment and was retrenched from service on and from 23.7.2006. When all the representations made by the petitioner were went in vain, he filed a writ petition in W.P.No.24856 of 2006 and obtained an order dated 7.8.2006 from this Court directing the Corporation to consider his representation. The Corporation by its order dated 18.9.2006 passed orders by assigning reasons that he had not worked for 240 days in the Corporation, that he had worked from 19.7.2005 to 6.8.2005 for 14 days and thereafter he had worked from 16.4.2006 to 7.5.2006 and altogether he had worked for 27 days, that his employment was necessitated due to increase in work load during festivals, absenteeism by workmen and also due to the strike notice issued by some unions. At the time of employment, the petitioner was aware that he was not eligible for any permanency, no appointment order was given to him, much less and no assurance was given to him for continuance of his employment after the expiry of the spell for which he was engaged. Further, he was informed that G.O.Ms.No.41 Transport (C.1) Department dated 13.7.2006 would not apply to him. The facts of the W.P.No.11456 of 2007 are also similar to W.P.No.11455 of 2007 except the difference that the petitioner was worked for a period of 12 days as per the order impugned. 6. Challenging the said orders of the Corporation, the petitioners in W.P.Nos.11455 and 11456 of 2007 filed writ petitions praying for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the order passed by the Corporation dated 18.9.2006 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to implement G.O.Ms.No.41 Transport (C.1) Department dated 13.7.2006 by following the Division Bench judgment and re-employ the petitioner to the post of driver in the respondent Corporation. The writ petition No.11457 of 2007 was filed claiming that the petitioner had worked for more than 240 days. On direction from this Court in W.P.No.761 of 1999, his claim was considered and rejected on the premise that he did not complete 240 days. However, the petitioner once again on the strength of G.O.Ms.No.41 Transport (C.1) Department dated 13.7.2006 filed the writ petition seeking for re- employment under Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act. 7. It could be seen from the order of the learned single Judge that during 1997, several writ petitions were filed seeking for re-instatement in service in the respondent Corporation. The Division Bench in W.A.Nos.1294 to 1299 of 1997 directed the respondent Corporation to reinstate the workers, who have completed 240 days of work, but retrenched in violation of Section 25-F, disregarding the fact whether they were sponsored through Employment Exchange or not. That order has become final. 8. Subsequently, the Government imposed ban on filling up of posts in public sector undertakings by G.O.Ms.No.27 Finance (BPE) Department dated 21.1.2002. Thereafter, by G.O.Ms.No.57 Transport dated 21.7.2005, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Government relaxed the ban of appointment and permitted as a special case to recruit 2000 drivers and 700 conductors in the respondent Corporation. When that exercise was being carried out by the respondent Corporation, the general election to the Legislative Assembly was announced and the model code of conduct came into operation. Hence, the persons selected as per the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.57 Transport dated 21.7.2005 were not allowed to join duty. After the election, another Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 13.7.2006 came to be issued, giving preference in appointment in the respondent Corporation to the persons, who were retrenched after their original engagement in the year 1997 and obtained orders from this Court for their re-employment in terms of Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act. In addition to that, preference was also given to similarly placed persons, who have approached this Court, but yet to get orders. Further preference was also given to the persons, who were terminated from service, but not approached the Court. 9. The persons, who were selected under G.O.Ms.No.57 Transport dated 21.7.2005 being aggrieved by the terms of G.O.Ms.No.41 Transport (C.1) Department dated 13.7.2006, filed a spate of writ petitions challenging the said G.O. The persons, who claimed benefit under the G.O.41, filed writ petitions for enforcement of the same. The learned single Judge upheld the validity of the G.O. barring the crucial year fixed as 1997. That order was carried on appeal before the Division Bench in W.A.Nos.345 to 347 of 2007, and disposed of on 12.3.2007 by recording the statement of the respondent that the appellants in the writ appeals and similarly placed persons would be first considered for appointment in the respondent Corporation (who were selected under G.O.Ms.No.57 Transport dated 21.7.2005) subject to their fulfilling of qualifications prescribed therefor. Thereafter the present writ petitions, which are the subject matter of the writ appeals, were filed before the Court claiming straight away mandamus to the respondents to implement the G.O.Ms.No.41 Transport (C.1) Department dated 13.7.2006 by following the Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 8.12.1997 made in W.A.Nos.1294 to 1299 of 1997. 10. While considering these three writ petitions, the learned single Judge considered the scope of Section 25-H with reference to the definition of the term “retrenchment” under Section 2(oo), as amended by Act No.49 of 1984 with effect from 18.8.1984 and held that the right of re-employment under Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act would have to be determined only if an employee's retrenchment comes within the definition of the term “retrenchment” found in Section 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act and that it was not hit by the exception found in sub-section (bb). The claim of the workmen would have to be determined as per Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act as observed by the learned single Judge in his order dated 14.12.2006, wherein the G.O.Ms.No.41 Transport (C.1) Department dated 13.7.2006 was upheld. The writ petitioners, who came to the Court with bogus claim, were not entitled for any consideration. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 11. While considering G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 13.7.2006, the learned single Judge observed that though the object of the first respondent in issuing G.O.Ms.No.41 dated 13.7.2006 to accommodate the persons covered by paragraph 4(i) might be inevitable, but the direction given in paragraph 4 (ii) and 4(iii) of the Government Order could not be undertaken by the respondent Corporation either until further orders are passed by this Court in cases filed by the workers or in other cases, the workmen get a declaration from the appropriate Labour Court. Thus, recording the finding, the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petitions by holding that the impugned order passed by the respondent Corporation did not suffer from any illegality or irregularity. 12. The facts of Writ Petition in W.P.No.24728 of 2007, which have been filed by as many as 25 petitioners, with reference to which the main argument has been advanced by Mr.Prasad are as follows: The petitioners were employed as conductors in the second respondent Corporation. All the petitioners have continuously worked as conductors for more than 240 days in the second respondent Corporation. The second respondent Corporation operates nearly 3000 buses. As per the man power norms fixed by the second respondent, there should be 2.5 drivers and 2.5 conductors per bus. Accordingly, the respondents should have 7500 drivers and 7500 conductors. But at the time of filing of the writ petition, the second respondent is having only 6000 drivers and 6000 conductors due to the reason of order of ban on recruitment of drivers and conductors. The second respondent in order to get over the problem of man power shortage, engaged temporary hands intermittently. As a result, the workers continued to be engaged for years temporarily. Some other retrenched workmen approached this Court and obtained an order from a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.1294 to 1299 of 1997 dated 8.12.1997 to the effect that the retrenched workmen, who had completed 240 days should be reinstated in service with back wages and continuity of service and in the cases of others, they should be given preference against future vacancies as per Section 25-H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The petitioners are entitled to the same treatment. The petitioners also entitled to the benefit of the Government Order in GO.Ms.No.41 Transport (C.1) Department dated 13.7.2006. 13. The material facts of the case in W.P.No.24743 of 2007 with reference to which Ms.Vaigai argued, are as follows: There are 26 petitioners. One Govindaraj sworn the affidavit. As per the affidavit, the petitioners were appointed on 6.12.2005 and have been continually working without any brake in service for more than 430 days. As per the relevant clause of the 12(3) settlement reached between the Union and the respondent Corporation in the year 1992, all temporary/casual/contract workers on daily wages who had come through Employment Exchange and completed 240 days in a year of service would be permanently absorbed in the respondent Corporation. This clause was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ reiterated in the settlement dated 31.8.2005. The petitioners stand on different footing. The stand of the respondent that in order to claim the benefit sought, the petitioners would come under Section 2(oo) of the Industrial Disputes Act would not applicable to them, as they are engaged with due sanction of the Government after following rules and procedure. The petitioners are entitled to protection under the settlement. 14. The Assistant Manager (Legal), Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Chennai filed a common counter affidavit as the relief sought for in all these cases under consideration are one and the