High Court · 2024

W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 12.09.2024CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULAW.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024 andW.M.P.Nos.28599, 28604 & 28606 of 2024Jayankondam Municipality,AIDUC Health Labor's Association,Thiruvalluvar Mavatta Municipal Panchayath Thozhilalar Sangam,Registration No.1101/TRI.AIDUC.No.310/TND,Rep by its General Secretary,Mr.T.Dhandapani. ... Petitioner in both W.Ps Vs. 1.The Administrative Director of Municipality, No.75, Urban Administrative Building, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 600 028. 2.The Director of Regional Municipality, Administration, Thanjavoor, Thanjavoor District. 3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Ariyalur, Ariyalur District 621 704. Page No.1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 20244.The Chairman, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205.5.The Commissioner, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205. 6.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Jayankondam Taluk, Ariyalur District. ... Respondents in bothW.PsPrayer in W.P.No.26170 of 2024: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records pertains to order of the 5th respondent dated 29.02.2024 made in Na.Ka.Enn.2257/2023 and to quash the same and further direct the 5th respondent to give arrears of wages in difference, pending for the past 61 months, as fixed by the 3rd respondent to the sweepers of Jayankondam Municipality, for a sum of Rs.54,47,100/-. Prayer in W.P.No.26174 of 2024: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records pertains to order of the 5th respondent dated 29.02.2024 made in Na.Ka.Enn.2257/2023/H1 and to quash the same and further direct the 5th respondent to give arrears of wages in difference as fixed by 3rd respondent to the labours working in Jayankondam Municipality in Dengue breeding control activities. Page No.2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024In both W.Ps.For Petitioner : Mr.R.RameshFor Respondents : Mr.R.Murthi, GA for R1,R2,R3 & R6 Mrs.M.Jayanthy, AGP for R4 Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar, AGP for R5 COMMON ORDER The petitioner has filed these Writ Petitions challenging the order of the fifth respondent Municipality dated 29.02.2024, denying the arrears of wages claimed by the members of the petitioner Union.2. Heard Mr.R.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Murthi, learned Government Advocate for R1,R2,R3 & R6, Mrs.M.Jayanthy, learned Additional Government Pleader for R4 and Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for R5 and perused the materials available on record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the members of the petitioner Union are the daily wage sweepers working in Jayankondam Municipality from the year 2016. The grievance of the workers is that despite the District Collector has revised the daily wages Page No.3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024of these labourers from time to time, that has not been implemented by the Municipality. The members of the petitioner Sangam have filing cases every now and then seeking direction to the concerned authority to disburse the arrears of wages. 4. In the similar Writ Petition filed in W.P.No.12775 of 2023, an order has been passed directing the fourth respondent to consider the proceedings of the District Collector dated 06.07.2021 and 11.10.2021 and pass orders. While complying the said direction, the fifth respondent has observed in the impugned order that the contractor through whom the members of the petitioner Sangam got engaged has agreed to the terms of the contract and in which, the rate of wages have already been fixed and only in accordance with that, the wages have been disbursed through contractor by name M/s.Durai & Co. The contractor also did not raise any demand and that there is no pending arrears of wages payable to the labourers supplied by him. So the fifth respondent disowned his liability by stating that the Municipality has got no liability or whatsoever to pay wages as claimed by the petitioner. Page No.4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 20245. The fourth and fifth respondents have approved the payment of wages as fixed by the District Collector from 01.01.2023 and to disburse the same to M/s.Durai & Co., in pursuant to the resolution passed by the Municipal Council in this regard. But the impugned order does not make any reference about the office endorsement dated 23.12.2023. Even according to the authorities, in the endorsement dated 23.12.2023 the consideration to pay the revised wages as per the orders of the Collector was only from 01.01.2023. 6. The learned Additional Government Pleaders appearing for the fourth and fifth respondents submitted that the petitioner is not Union but it is an Association. But the Association cannot represent the case of the members of the petitioner and the individuals have to file the Writ Petitions. 7. Even without going into the technicalities of the matter, the fact remains that the members of the petitioner Sangam are the persons engaged through an outsourcing agent by name M/s.Durai & Co. M/s.Durai & Co is not a party to the proceedings. Since the respondents 4 Page No.5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024and 5 have stated in the impugned order itself that they are answerable only to the outsourcing agent and not to the labourers engaged by the outsourcing agent. Hence, I feel the petitioner or the members of the petitioner shall make a representation to the outsourcing agent M/s.Durai & Co and get clarification from the said outsourcing agent and then file a fresh representation through M/s.Durai & Co and on receipt of the same, the respondents 4 and 5 can consider and pass orders on the same on merits. Since the impugned order has been passed not on the request made by M/s.Durai & Co, the same shall not stand as an impediment for any fresh consideration on the petition, if any, made by the outsourcing agent by name M/s.Durai & Co. 8. With the above directions, these Writ Petitions are disposed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index: Yes /No 12.09.2024Speaking / Non-speakingNeutral Citation : Yes / NogskTo1.The Administrative Director of Page No.6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024 Municipality, No.75, Urban Administrative Building, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 600 028. 2.The Director of Regional Municipality, Administration, Thanjavoor, Thanjavoor District. 3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Ariyalur, Ariyalur District 621 704. 4.The Chairman, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205.5.The Commissioner, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205. 6.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Jayankondam Taluk, Ariyalur District. Page No.7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024R.N.MANJULA , J. gskW.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024 andW.M.P.Nos.28599, 28604 & 28606 of 202412.09.2024Page No.8 of 8

W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 12.09.2024CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULAW.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024 andW.M.P.Nos.28599, 28604 & 28606 of 2024Jayankondam Municipality,AIDUC Health Labor's Association,Thiruvalluvar Mavatta Municipal Panchayath Thozhilalar Sangam,Registration No.1101/TRI.AIDUC.No.310/TND,Rep by its General Secretary,Mr.T.Dhandapani. ... Petitioner in both W.Ps Vs. 1.The Administrative Director of Municipality, No.75, Urban Administrative Building, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 600 028. 2.The Director of Regional Municipality, Administration, Thanjavoor, Thanjavoor District. 3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Ariyalur, Ariyalur District 621 704. Page No.1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 20244.The Chairman, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205.5.The Commissioner, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205. 6.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Jayankondam Taluk, Ariyalur District. ... Respondents in bothW.PsPrayer in W.P.No.26170 of 2024: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records pertains to order of the 5th respondent dated 29.02.2024 made in Na.Ka.Enn.2257/2023 and to quash the same and further direct the 5th respondent to give arrears of wages in difference, pending for the past 61 months, as fixed by the 3rd respondent to the sweepers of Jayankondam Municipality, for a sum of Rs.54,47,100/-. Prayer in W.P.No.26174 of 2024: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records pertains to order of the 5th respondent dated 29.02.2024 made in Na.Ka.Enn.2257/2023/H1 and to quash the same and further direct the 5th respondent to give arrears of wages in difference as fixed by 3rd respondent to the labours working in Jayankondam Municipality in Dengue breeding control activities. Page No.2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024In both W.Ps.For Petitioner : Mr.R.RameshFor Respondents : Mr.R.Murthi, GA for R1,R2,R3 & R6 Mrs.M.Jayanthy, AGP for R4 Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar, AGP for R5 COMMON ORDER The petitioner has filed these Writ Petitions challenging the order of the fifth respondent Municipality dated 29.02.2024, denying the arrears of wages claimed by the members of the petitioner Union.2. Heard Mr.R.Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Murthi, learned Government Advocate for R1,R2,R3 & R6, Mrs.M.Jayanthy, learned Additional Government Pleader for R4 and Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for R5 and perused the materials available on record. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the members of the petitioner Union are the daily wage sweepers working in Jayankondam Municipality from the year 2016. The grievance of the workers is that despite the District Collector has revised the daily wages Page No.3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024of these labourers from time to time, that has not been implemented by the Municipality. The members of the petitioner Sangam have filing cases every now and then seeking direction to the concerned authority to disburse the arrears of wages. 4. In the similar Writ Petition filed in W.P.No.12775 of 2023, an order has been passed directing the fourth respondent to consider the proceedings of the District Collector dated 06.07.2021 and 11.10.2021 and pass orders. While complying the said direction, the fifth respondent has observed in the impugned order that the contractor through whom the members of the petitioner Sangam got engaged has agreed to the terms of the contract and in which, the rate of wages have already been fixed and only in accordance with that, the wages have been disbursed through contractor by name M/s.Durai & Co. The contractor also did not raise any demand and that there is no pending arrears of wages payable to the labourers supplied by him. So the fifth respondent disowned his liability by stating that the Municipality has got no liability or whatsoever to pay wages as claimed by the petitioner. Page No.4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 20245. The fourth and fifth respondents have approved the payment of wages as fixed by the District Collector from 01.01.2023 and to disburse the same to M/s.Durai & Co., in pursuant to the resolution passed by the Municipal Council in this regard. But the impugned order does not make any reference about the office endorsement dated 23.12.2023. Even according to the authorities, in the endorsement dated 23.12.2023 the consideration to pay the revised wages as per the orders of the Collector was only from 01.01.2023. 6. The learned Additional Government Pleaders appearing for the fourth and fifth respondents submitted that the petitioner is not Union but it is an Association. But the Association cannot represent the case of the members of the petitioner and the individuals have to file the Writ Petitions. 7. Even without going into the technicalities of the matter, the fact remains that the members of the petitioner Sangam are the persons engaged through an outsourcing agent by name M/s.Durai & Co. M/s.Durai & Co is not a party to the proceedings. Since the respondents 4 Page No.5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024and 5 have stated in the impugned order itself that they are answerable only to the outsourcing agent and not to the labourers engaged by the outsourcing agent. Hence, I feel the petitioner or the members of the petitioner shall make a representation to the outsourcing agent M/s.Durai & Co and get clarification from the said outsourcing agent and then file a fresh representation through M/s.Durai & Co and on receipt of the same, the respondents 4 and 5 can consider and pass orders on the same on merits. Since the impugned order has been passed not on the request made by M/s.Durai & Co, the same shall not stand as an impediment for any fresh consideration on the petition, if any, made by the outsourcing agent by name M/s.Durai & Co. 8. With the above directions, these Writ Petitions are disposed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index: Yes /No 12.09.2024Speaking / Non-speakingNeutral Citation : Yes / NogskTo1.The Administrative Director of Page No.6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024 Municipality, No.75, Urban Administrative Building, Santhome High Road, MRC Nagar, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai 600 028. 2.The Director of Regional Municipality, Administration, Thanjavoor, Thanjavoor District. 3.The District Collector, Collectorate, Ariyalur, Ariyalur District 621 704. 4.The Chairman, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205.5.The Commissioner, Jayankondam Municipality, Ariyalur District 621 205. 6.The Tahsildar, Office of the Tahsildar, Jayankondam Taluk, Ariyalur District. Page No.7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024R.N.MANJULA , J. gskW.P.Nos.26170 & 26174 of 2024 andW.M.P.Nos.28599, 28604 & 28606 of 202412.09.2024Page No.8 of 8