IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated 3.2.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.31176 of 2006 (T) (O.A.NO.8852 of 1998) K.Balasubramanian ... Petitioner/Applicant -Vs.- 1. The Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department, Madras-9. 2. The Director of Town Panchayat, Kuralagam, Madras-600 108. 3. The Executive Officer, Nannilam Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Nannilam, Tanjore District. ... Respondents/Respondents Original Application No.8852 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench praying to direct the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner/applicant with effect from the date of initial appointment and for other consequential benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition. For petitioners : Mr.Anand For respondents : Mr.B.Vijay Government Advocate. O R D E R Original Application No.8852 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench praying to direct the respondents to regularise the service of the applicant with effect from the date of initial appointment and for other https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ consequential benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was 34 years when the O.A. was filed in the year 1998. He was appointed as night watchman on daily wage basis by the third respondent Executive Officer, Nannilam Selection Grade Town Panchayat. Subsequently, he was appointed on a regular basis in time-scale of pay with effect from 1.3.1996. However, the respondents once again relieved the petitioner and appointed him on daily wage basis. Therefore, petitioner made a representation on 29.7.1998 to regularise his service. No order is passed in the said representation. Hence, the petitioner filed O.A. and renumbered as writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner pleaded that the respondents should be directed to dispose off the representation of the petitioner and the petitioner should also be permitted to make further representation so as to ventilate his grievance. 4. Heard Thiru B.Vijay, learned Government Advocate. 5. In this case, the petitioner states that his service was regularised in the time scale of pay and subsequently he has been relieved and posted on daily wage basis. These are matters of record which can be verified by the competent authority. The representation dated 29.7.1998 has not been considered on merits and disposed off according to the learned counsel for the petitioner. In view of the same, the petitioner is permitted to make further representation together with a copy of this order to the third respondent within a month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and such representation shall be considered on merits and disposed off within three months thereafter. This Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ts To 1. The Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department, Madras-9. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The Director of Town Panchayat, Kuralagam, Madras-600 108. 3. The Executive Officer, Nannilam Selection Grade Town Panchayat, Nannilam, Tanjore District. + 1 CC TO The Govt., Pleader, SR 6889 + 1 cc to Mr.K.H.Ravikumar, SR 6110 Order in W.P.No.31176 of 2006 KSK (CO) RH (11.2.10) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/