High CourtsSingle Bench(2006) 03 MAD CK 0055

V. Perumal vs The Commissioner and Secretary to the Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, The Director of Medical Education and The Dean

Madras High Court · Decided on 29 March 2006 · Citation: (2006) 2 MLJ 339

HON’BLE JUDGES
N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 37865 of 2005 and W.P.M.P. No. 40537 of 2005

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

33 paragraphs · 708 words

N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.—The prayer in this writ petition is to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the G.O.D.No.841 dated

27.06.1995 in so far as granting relaxation for not possessing the 8th standard qualification to the petitioner only with retrospective effect from

27.06.1995 instead of the petitioner''s date of appointment from 01.09.1974 is concerned.

2.

The grievance of the petitioner as stated in the affidavit is that the petitioner was appointed as Hospital Servant on regular basis with effect from

19.03.1965 and the petitioner completed his probation in the said post on 25.03.1966. The petitioner was thereafter, temporarily appointed as

Nursing Assistant Grade II. The petitioner underwent training prescribed for Nursing Assistant and also passed a test at the end of training on

30.08.1975. The qualification prescribed for the post of Male Nursing Assistant was a pass in 8th standard and nursing training. However, since

the petitioner worked in the Hospital as Hospital Servant from the year 1965, the petitioner was given temporary appointment as Nursing Assistant

Grade II, even though he was having only 5th standard qualification. The petitioner was paid the annual increment as Male Nursing Assistant till

30.09.1990 and from 01.10.1990 onwards, the petitioner is not paid the annual increments on the ground that the petitioner was not possessing

the qualification prescribed under the Rules. Therefore, the petitioner submitted an application for relaxation of qualification pursuant to which the

Director of Medical Education sent a proposal for relaxing the petitioner''s qualification for not having the 8th standard pass in a recognised school.

3.

In the said representation dated 22.12.1993, sent by the Director of Medical Education followed by the reminders dated 25.03.1994 and

07.03.1995, the Director of Medical Education requested the Government to relax the qualification so as to enable the petitioner''s service to be

regularised. The Impugned order was passed by the Government on 27.06.1995 and relaxed the qualification prescribed in category 13 B of the

Tamil Nadu Medical Subordinate Services Branch V Miscellaneous. Even though the relaxation is granted to the petitioner, the Government

restricted the said relaxation from the date of issue of the order, i.e., from 27.06.1995.

4.

The grievance of the petitioner is that there is no justification to restrict the relaxation applicable prospectively and not from the date of

petitioner''s passing the Nursing Assistant test from 30.08.1975. The Government have relaxed the qualification in favour of the petitioner and

having regard to the appointment of the petitioner as Hospital Servant on regular basis with effect from 19.03.1965 and having appointed the

petitioner as Nursing Assistant Grade II temporarily and the petitioner having completed training on 30.08.1975, there is no justification on the part

of the Government to restrict the relaxation only from the date of the order. The relaxation is granted by the Government for the purpose of

regularisation of petitioner''s service. The regularisation of service cannot be made after 20 years of the petitioner''s service. If the impugned

Government Order is applied strictly, the petitioner''s valuable service of 20 years will get obliterated and the petitioner will not be in a position to

get annual increments and other benefits. Hence, the action of the first respondent in restricting the relaxation only from 27.06.1995 is unreasonable

and an arbitrary in exercise of power.

5.

Taking note of the facts and circumstances of this case and particularly, the recommendations made by the Director Medical Education, I am of

view that the impugned order in restricting the relaxation only from 27.06.1995 is liable to be quashed and the same is quashed. It is represented

by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner retired from service on 31.07.2002 and therefore, the effect of regularisation from

30.08.1975, as ordered now, the salary shall be refixed and arrears of salary payable to the petitioner till the date of retirement shall be calculated

and paid within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the revision of pension and arrears of pension shall also

be made and paid within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.

The writ petition is allowed with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected W.P.M.P. is closed.