AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the proceedings of the first respondent, dated 14.5.1999 and 10.5.2000, refusing
to entertain the request of the petitioner to reinstate the petitioner in service, as a Noon Meal Organiser.
It has been stated that the petitioner had joined in service as a Noon Meal Organiser in P. Pudur Government Higher Secondary School, on
1.2.1983. He had served in the said post till 3.2.1994. However, due to certain family circumstances and due to his ill-health he could not continue
in service for a period of four years. No disciplinary proceedings had been initiated against the petitioner and no order had been passed removing
the petitioner from service. However, the petitioner was not permitted to join duty when he had returned to continue his service. In such
circumstances, the petitioner had made several representations to allow him to join in service. However, the respondents had passed the impugned
orders, refusing the request of the petitioner.
The main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that even though the petitioner had not been service for four years, similarly
placed persons, as that of the petitioner, had been reinstated in service.
The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has not been in a position to show that the petitioner is entitled to be reinstated in service, as a
Noon Meal Organiser, as prayed for by him, in accordance with the service rules applicable to the said post. Further, it is not known as to the
circumstances under which other similarly placed persons, if any, have been reinstated in service. In such circumstances, this Court does not find
sufficient cause or reason to grant the reliefs prayed for by the petitioner. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.