High Court · 2025

W.P.No.46013 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 26.11.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANW.P.No.46013 of 2025 andW.M.P.No.51317 of 2025A.Dhatchanamoorthy...Petitioner -Vs-1.The State of Tamil NaduRep. By its Additional Chief Secretary to Government,Environment, Climate Change and Forest Department,Fort St.George, Chennai,Tamil Nadu -600 009.2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests &Head of Forests Force,Velachery Main Road, Guindy, ChennaiTamil Nadu -600 032.... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records which culminated in issuing in Ref.No.LL1/9694/2020 dated 05.09.2022 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same with consequential direction to the respondents to notionally regularize the petitioner service by relaxing the rules after completion of ten years from the date of initial engagement on 01.02.1981 as a Plot Watcher on daily wage basis similar to Mr.(Late) A.Sanmugavelu (SWSL No.4887) and M.Karunanidhi (SWSL No.5566) seniority regularization along with regular service as qualifying service for the purpose of getting pension and family pension in the light of Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment delivered in C.A.No.6798 of 2019 dated Page 1 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.46013 of 202502.09.2019 and this Court orders passed in W.P.No.20845 of 2023 dated 03.08.2023, W.P.(MD) No.15339 of 2024 dated 10.07.2024, W.P.No.19605 of 2024 dated 15.07.2024 and W.P.No.18079 of 2019 dated 19.11.2024 were complied in G.O.(2D) No.98, dated 24.09.2024 and G.O.(2D) No.65, dated 21.04.2025 respectively of the 1st respondent as per Tamil Nadu Fundamental Rule 27(17) to confer all consequential pensionary benefits within time frame as fixed by this Court.For Petitioner : Mr.Kanna Patel IFor Respondents : Mr.C.Selvaraj Additional Government Pleader ORDERThis writ petition has been filed calling for the entire records which culminated in issuingRef.No.LL1/9694/2020 dated 05.09.2022 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same with consequential direction to the respondents to notionally regularize the petitioner service by relaxing the rules after completion of ten years from the date of initial engagement on 01.02.1981 as a Plot Watcher on daily wage basis similar to Mr.(Late) A.Sanmugavelu (SWSL No.4887) and M.Karunanidhi (SWSL No.5566) seniority regularization along with regular service as qualifying service for the purpose of getting pension and family pension in the light of Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment delivered in C.A.No.6798 of 2019 dated 02.09.2019 and this Court orders passed in W.P.No.20845 of 2023 dated 03.08.2023, W.P.(MD) No.15339 of 2024 dated 10.07.2024, W.P.No.19605 of 2024 dated 15.07.2024 and W.P.No.18079 of 2019 dated 19.11.2024 were complied in G.O.(2D) No.98, Page 2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.46013 of 2025dated 24.09.2024 and G.O.(2D) No.65, dated 21.04.2025 respectively of the 1st respondent as per Tamil Nadu Fundamental Rule 27(17) to confer all consequential pensionary benefits within time frame as fixed by this Court.2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.3. The petitioner had joined in the Forest Department on daily wage basis, on 01.02.1981. After two decades of service, he was brought into the regular service on 22.12.2007. Thereafter, as per G.O.Ms.No.148, Environment (M) and Forest (2) Department dated 21.12.2006, he was posted as Office Assistant on 15.09.2021. Subsequently, he retired from service due to the attainment of age of superannuation. However, the petitioner did not get any pensionary benefits after his retirement, since his service was regularized only after 01.04.2003, viz., after the cut-off date fixed by new pensionary scheme for purpose of getting pension. However, his juniors, whose service were regularized before 01.04.2003 are getting pensionary benefits. The respondents did not follow the seniority list in the matters of regularization of service to the employees engaged on daily wage basis. Till 1994, the only qualification for appointment of Plot Watcher is ability to read and write. However, as per G.O.Ms.No.332 Environment and Forest Department dated 22.12.1994, SSLC Page 3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.46013 of 2025was prescribed as minimum general educational qualification for bringing into regular time scale of pay from employees like Plot Watcher on daily wage basis. Therefore, so many of them could not be considered for appointment of Forest Watcher, since he did not possess SSLC as a qualification. So many persons approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and obtained an interim order. However, in the meantime, so many juniors were brought in regular time scale in the post of Forest Watcher, in the year 1995. In order to wriggle out of the said situation G.O.Ms.No.64 Environment and Forest Department dated 08.03.1999 came to be passed, whereby G.O.Ms.No.332 Environment and Forest Department dated 22.12.1994 was superseded and revoked. Therefore, the prescription of SSLC qualification for appointment of Forest Watcher promoted from Plot Watcher and Social Forestry workers engaged on daily wage basis, is no longer in existence.4. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation. Thereafter, the petitioner retired from service, due to his attainment of age of superannuation. Since his service was regularized only after 01.04.2003, he was not granted any pension.5. In similar issues, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Prem Singh Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others in C.A.No.6798 of 2019 Page 4 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.46013 of 2025dated 02.09.2019, held as follows:-“ 35. There are some of the employees who have not been regularized in spite of having rendered theservices for 30-40 or more years whereas they have been superannuated. As they have worked in the work-charged establishment, not against any particular project, their services ought to have been regularized under the Government instructions and even as per the decision of this Court in Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Uma Devi 2006 (4) SCC 1. This Court in the said decision has laid down that in case services have been rendered for more than ten years without the cover of the Court's order, as one time measure, the services be regularized of such employees. In the facts of the case, those employees who have worked for ten years or more should have been regularized. It would not be proper to regulate them for consideration of regularisation as others have been regularised, we direct that their services be treated as a regular one. However, it is made clear that they shall not be entitled to claiming any dues of difference in wages had they been continued in service regularly before attaining the age of superannuation. They shall be entitled to receive the pension as if they have retired from the regular establishment and the services rendered by them right from the day they entered the work-charged establishment shall be counted as qualifying service for purpose of pension.”6. Thus, it is clear that the petitioner is also entitled to be regularized in his service from the date on which he completed ten years of service as Plot Watcher for the purpose of getting pension. Therefore, the petitioner made a representation.7. In view of the above, the impugned order cannot be sustained and is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, Ref.No.LL1/9694/2020 dated 05.09.2022 is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 09.05.2019 and pass orders on merits and Page 5 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.46013 of 2025in accordance with law, in the light of the judgment delivered in C.A.No.6798 of 2019 dated 02.09.2019 and orders passed in W.P.No.20845 of 2023 dated 03.08.2023, W.P.(MD) No.15339 of 2024 dated 10.07.2024, W.P.No.19605 of 2024 dated 15.07.2024 and W.P.No.18079 of 2019 dated 19.11.2024, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.8. In the result, this writ petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.26.11.2025Internet: Yes Index : Yes/NoSpeaking/Non Speaking orderNeutral Citation : Yes/NosliTo1.The State of Tamil NaduRep. By its Additional Chief Secretary to Government,Environment, Climate Change and Forest Department,Fort St.George, Chennai,Tamil Nadu -600 009.2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests &Head of Forests Force,Velachery Main Road, Guindy, ChennaiTamil Nadu -600 032.Page 6 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.46013 of 2025G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,sliW.P.No.46013 of 202526.11.2025(2/5)Page 7 of 7