AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G. Rajasuria, J.—The petitioner filed Original Application in O.A. No. 587 of 2003 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal;
consequent upon its abolition, the said Original Application was transferred to this Court and re-numbered as W.P. 1848 of 2006, to call for the
records of the first respondent relating to Pro.Na.Ka. No. 14317/2002/Pa.2, dated 01/08/2002, quash the same and issue directions to the first
respondent to pass consequential order of approval of appointment as office Assistants of the Applicants herein in Viralimalai Panchayat Union and
appoint them with effect from 27.06.2001 with all consequential service and monetary benefits.
Heard both sides.
The nutshell facts which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this writ petition would run thus:
The writ petitioners, according to them, were selected by the Commissioner concerned after obtaining the list from the Employment Exchange for
the post of Office Assistants in Viralimalai Panchayat Union. As per the rules, the selection has to be approved by the Collector, accordingly it was
sent to the Collector and while he was considering it, he received two communications vide,
(i) Memo.O.Mu. No. 11207/2001, dated 18.07.2001, that there is stay order in O.A. No. 3214 of 2001, passed by the Tribunal against the filling
up of posts of Office Assistants, by direct recruitment in the Panchayat Union.
(ii) G.O.Ms. No. 242, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (P) Department, dated 29.11.2001.
Thereupon, everything had come to a grinding halt and till now the petitioners are without any remedy. Accordingly, the petitioners pray for they
being appointed as Office Assistant.
Per contra, the Commissioner filed the counter detailing and delineating, expressing and expatiating the facts that the writ petitioners herein were
earlier selected for the Post of Office Assistants in Viralimalai Panchayat Union after getting the list from the Employment Exchange and as per rule,
when it was sent to the Collector for approval, it was returned for reconsideration and once again, it was resubmitted. In the meanwhile, the
Commissioner issued orders appointing the petitioners. However, the Collector rejected the selection and thereupon, fresh selection list was called
from the Employment Exchange and once again, the writ petitioners were selected and it was sent for approval to the Collector.
In the meanwhile, the Collector was in receipt of the aforesaid stay order and ban order. Furthermore, the same writ petitioners herein earlier
filed separately two O.A. Nos. 3363 and 3364 of 2002 and in that, the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal passed orders on 20.06.2002,
directing the Collector to consider the representation of the petitioners in the light of the recommendations of the Commissioner concerned.
However, the Collector passed order to the effect that in view of the ban order as well as the stay order in one other matter, the request of the
petitioners could not be accepted.
At the hearing, it has been clarified by the learned Government Pleader that there is no ban order now. However, relating to stay order granted
in O.A. No. 3214 of 2001 which was filed by Cholera Mazdoor Association as against direct recruitment of the Office Assistants, neither the
learned Government Pleader nor the learned Counsel for the petitioners could enlighten this Court as to whether the stay is in vogue or not.
Hence, in these circumstances, the following direction is issued:
It is for the Collector to get himself satisfied about the fact as to whether the said stay order is in force or not and if it is found that no stay is in
vogue, then he shall pass suitable orders considering the representation of the petitioners already submitted to the Commissioner concerned. The
entire process shall be completed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
With the above direction, this petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.