High Court · 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED :09.2.2009C O R A M :THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K. CHANDRUW.P.No.31681 of 2006(O.A.No.1316 of 1997)1.S.Velammal 2.R.Padmavathy3.M.Mehrunisa4.D.Nachiyarammal5.N.Chellammal6.C.Indirani Chelin7.M.Savitri8.L.Mari9.J.Rajeswari10.K.Kasthuri11.V.Navaneedham12.P.Senthamarai13.V.Agnesh14.R.Kirubamani15.M.Radhambal16.K.Saroja17.S.Annalammal18.K.Valli 19.T.Pappa20.M.Kasthuri21.R.Annammal22.K.Parvathi23.M.Ammenabegam24.A.Indirani25.S.Saradha26.V.Rani27.V.N.Parvathi28.V.Mariyammal29.C.Loordhumary30.P.Dhanalakshmi31.P.Gowri32.S.Sakunthala33.Jayamani34.K.Jayalakshmi35.S.Gowri36.W.Chottima Bee37.S.Saroja38.C.Rani39.A.Madhina Bee https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

40.R.Lakshmi41.S.Rani42.L.Sulochana43.M.Chandra44.V.Murugammal45.P.Pappa46.P.Karthiyayini47.M.Selvarani48.R.Indrani49.R.Pattammal50.C.Vachala51.M.Abdhabegam52.K.Zamina Bee53.G.Anandha Valli54.S.Lakshmi55.A.Mumtaj56.M.Rukmani57.A.Alamelu58.A.Banumadhi59.L.Ranjitham60.M.alayamma61.S.Amirtham62.C.Muniyammal63.A.Arokya Mari64.M.Valli.65.M.Anthoniyammal66.K.Premavathi67.N.Gowri68.M.K.Andhoniyammal69.D.Vachala Devi70.G.Madhrilea71.K.Pankajam72.N.Sarojini73.K.Chandra74.G.Sakunthala75.G.Mariyammal76.R.Krishnaveni77.N.Radha Bai78.M.Vasuki79.M.Padmavathi80.L.Leela Bai81.A.Lakshmi82.K.Maha83.K.M.Saroja84.A.Muthamma85.D.Dhayamani86.M.Neela87.K.Kanaga88.M.Vasantha89.S.Vasantha .. Petitioners https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Vs1. The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Department of Home, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.2. The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai-8.3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Armed Reserve Police, Commissioner's Office, Egmore, Madras-8.... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution ofIndia praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus as statedtherein.For petitioners: Mr.V.Prakash, SC for M/s.Rama Priya For respondents : Mrs.Sneha, GA *****O R D E R The 89 petitioners who are serving as female prisonwardens/Police Ayahs in the various jails in Tamil Nadu filedO.A.No.1316 of 1997 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunalseeking for the following reliefs as found in their originalapplication:-(a)provide identity cards and badges;(b)provide uniforms, footwear and rain coats on par withthat provided to women constables;(c)extend the facility of housing in the police quarters;(d)issue the necessary cards in order to facilitate them topurchase provisions from the police stores;(e)provide atleast one day's leave every week or 'weeklyoff' ;(f)provide with a comfortable rest room in their places ofwork;(g)not to either engage or permit them to be engaged in thehouses of police officers to do menial work;(h)to pay funeral expenses to the legal heirs of thepetitioners immediately following their death. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The grievance of the petitioners was that by G.O.Ms.No.2671,Home, dated 07.12.1988, they were made permanent as Police Ayahs.Even though they have been made permanent, they are not given variousbenefits which are extended to other government servants. It is alsostated that in the matter of grant of leave there was discriminationand while the woman police constables are entitled for duty off oncea week labelled as 'weekly off' there is no such facility extended tothese persons. It was also stated that they have been denied rationcards to purchase provision from the police stores. The HRA that ispaid to them was meager and they do not even have a waiting room inthe places where they were supposed to work. Many times, they weremade to work in the houses of police officers as slave labourers.Even when they die, the legal heirs are not provided with funeralexpenses as provided to women constables. After sending a legalnotice to the respondents, they have filed the original applicationbefore the Tribunal. 3. On notice from the Tribunal, on behalf of the first respondentState, a detailed reply affidavit dated 18.7.1997 has been filed. Itwas stated that for the notice sent to them, a reply dated 31.7.1996was sent which was enclosed along with the reply affidavit. But itis seen from the records that no such reply has been annexed to thereply affidavit furnished to the Court. It is generally stated thatthey are not equal to the policemen in service and they do not belongto Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service. Therefore they cannot begiven equal status. With reference to the identity cards, it isstated that since they belonged to the basic service, they do notrequire an identity card. Since the duties of the policeman aredifferent from that of the police Ayahs, the denial of weekly offcannot be construed as discrimination. It is also stated that inrespect of purchase of rations, only ministerial staff and the policepersonnel can buy provisions. Admission to the Ayah category willhave to be done by the Committee. Though the Committee is defunctfrom 1995, but stores are still running.4. In respect of the rest rooms in paragraph No.15 of the counteraffidavit, it is averred as follows:-''... it is submitted that the grievances in this paragraphis that the applicants lack of facilities in the rest roomwhich offers no protection from the vagaries of weather.The respondent submits that action will be taken to bringbasic amenities to the rest room provided to theapplicants".5. With reference to the allegation regarding sending them towork in the houses of police officers, the same was denied. It waspointed out that in respect of the specific allegation, a probe hasbeen ordered and action will be initiated against them. It is alsostated that if they also join the fund for grant of lumpsum amount ofRs.1 lakh as has been paid to the Government servants families, then https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ in case of death amounts are advanced for funeral expenses. If anyrequest is made for an instant grant, that may be done. In the lightof the same, it was sought for the dismissal of the case of thepetitioners. 6. On the abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferredto this court and was re-numbered as W.P.No.31681 of 2006.7. Mr.V.Prakash, learned Senior Counsel appearing for thepetitioners submitted that the contentions raised by the respondentsare not genuine and liable to be rejected. Whether it is a policeAyah coming under the basic service or the other persons workingunder the subordinate service, there cannot be any difference in thematter of weekly off, and it is a universal right. Further, thereason for not granting identity cards or badges cannot be acceptedon the basis of the service in which they are working. The learnedcounsel also referred to the judgment of this Court in W.P.No.21243of 2006 dated 9.1.2007 wherein this court had granted severaldirections in respect of persons kept in the Central Prisons andother Sub-Jails in the State of Tamil Nadu. It was also implementedby the Additional Director General of Prisons vide his circularNo.29324/CN/2/2006 dated 15.3.2006. By the said order, even theprisoners have been given identity cards, there is no reason why thepetitioners cannot be granted identity cards. He also stated thatbenefits are extended to the prisoners only for the purpose ofshowing that there is humanitarian treatment in prisons and that theprisoners will get reformed. But in the case of petitioners thoughthey were working either as female prison wardens or as police Ayahs,the same considerations are not extended. 8. The argument advanced by the respondents cannot be accepted.It is no doubt true that the service conditions cannot be uniform.But with reference to the basic issues the respondents will have tokeep in mind the mandate of Article 43 of the Constitution, whichprovides for the conditions of work ensuring a decent standard oflife and full enjoyment of leisure.9. Hence, it is directed that the respondents shall provide tothe petitioners and other similarly placed persons within a period ofthree months the following amenities and facilities :-a) the police Ayahs or female prison wardens will be providedidentity cards and badges.b) They will be provided uniform, footwear and raincoats on parwith the women constables.c) they will be provided necessary ration cards to purchaseprovision from the police stores;d) they will be provided one day's leave every week or a weeklyoff for over six days' of work. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ e) to whichever place they are posted, they will be provided acomfortable rest room. 10. The writ petition is ordered in the above terms. No costs.Sd/Asst.Registrar/true copy/Sub Asst.RegistrarjsTo1. The Secretary, Department of Home, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.2. The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai-8.3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Armed Reserve Police, Commissioner's Office, Egmore, Madras-8.1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.5551 W.P.No.31681 of 2006(O.A.No.1316 of 1997) SR(CO)SRA(6/03/2009)