G.M.Gladwin, vs The Commissioner

Court
Madras High Court

WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 28-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.K. RAMAKRISHNAN
WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011101152026}
G.M.Gladwin,
Skilled Assistant Grade - 1,
Tuticorin City Municipal Corporation Tuticorin,
Tuticorin District.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
The Commissioner
Tuticorin City Municipal Corporation
Tuticorin,
Tuticorin District.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying
to prefer this Memorandum of Grounds of Writ Appeal against the order
passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No. 6205 of 2021 dated 30.10.2025.
For Petitioner(s) :Mr.S.Louis
For Respondent(s) :Mr.N.Ananda Kumar,
Standing Counsel
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.Velmurugan J.)
Challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge
dismissing the writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.6205 of 2021, dated
30.10.2025, the appellant/writ petitioner has filed the present writ appeal.
__________
Page  1  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 05:52:45 pm )

WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
2. Mr. N. Ananda Kumar, learned counsel, takes notice for the
respondent.
3. With the consent of both parties, the writ appeal is taken up for
final disposal at the admission stage itself.
4. The appellant filed the writ petition in W.P.(MD) No.6205 of
2021, challenging the proceedings of the respondent Corporation in Ref.
No.E2.21489/89, dated 25.05.2006, and Ref. No.E2/12947/2009, dated
02.03.2021, and seeking to quash the same. The appellant also sought a
direction to the respondent Corporation to regularise his services as
Wireman with effect from 01.04.1993, in terms of the award passed by
the Labour Court, Tirunelveli, in I.D. No.146 of 1995, dated 15.12.2003,
together with all monetary and attendant benefits.
5. The learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition primarily
on the ground that the appellant had not offered any satisfactory
explanation for the delay in challenging the impugned proceedings and
had approached this Court after a lapse of more than 15 years from the
date of the impugned regularisation order.
__________
Page  2  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 05:52:45 pm )

WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
6. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has preferred the
present writ appeal.
7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that
the appellant was appointed as a Wireman on 04.10.1989 and was
subsequently confirmed against a sanctioned post with effect from
01.04.1993. The Labour Court had also directed the regularisation of his
services with effect from 01.04.1993. However, the respondent
Corporation failed to implement the said award. He further submitted
that, pursuant to the directions issued in W.P.(MD) No.25417 of 2019,
the appellant's representation seeking regularisation of his services was
considered and rejected by the respondent by proceedings dated
02.03.2021. Immediately thereafter, the appellant challenged the said
proceedings by filing the present writ petition. Therefore, the learned
Single Judge ought not to have dismissed the writ petition on the ground
of delay and laches without considering the appellant's claim for
regularisation with effect from 01.04.1993. Hence, the learned counsel
prayed that the order passed by the learned Single Judge be set aside and
the writ appeal be allowed.
__________
Page  3  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 05:52:45 pm )

WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
8. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent
submitted that the impugned proceedings were issued as early as on
25.05.2006. Challenging the said proceedings, the appellant had earlier
filed W.P.(MD) No.6813 of 2009, seeking a writ of mandamus. However,
the appellant subsequently withdrew the said writ petition without
obtaining any liberty from this Court to challenge the proceedings dated
25.05.2006. Therefore, the appellant cannot now be permitted to
challenge the said proceedings after a lapse of more than 15 years. In
such circumstances, the learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing
the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches. Hence, the learned
counsel submitted that the order passed by the learned Single Judge does
not warrant any interference by this Court.
9. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as
well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondent and perused the
materials available on record.
10. On a perusal of the records, it is evident that the impugned
proceedings were issued by the respondent Corporation on 25.05.2006.
Thereafter, the appellant filed W.P.(MD) No.6813 of 2009, seeking a writ
of mandamus, without specifically challenging the said proceedings.
__________
Page  4  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 05:52:45 pm )

WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
Subsequently, the appellant withdrew the said writ petition without
seeking any liberty from this Court to challenge the proceedings dated
25.05.2006. In such circumstances, the appellant, after a lapse of more
than 15 years from the date of issuance of the impugned regularisation
order, filed the present writ petition challenging the same. However, the
appellant has not given any satisfactory explanation for the inordinate
delay in challenging the said proceedings. Therefore, the learned Single
Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition on the ground of delay and
laches.
11. In view of the foregoing reasons, we do not find any infirmity
or illegality in the order passed by the learned Single Judge warranting
interference by this Court.
12.Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. There shall be no
order as to costs.
(P.V.,J.) (K.K.R.K.,J.)
28-10-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
AM
__________
Page  5  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 05:52:45 pm )

WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
To
The Commissioner
Tuticorin City Municipal Corporation
Tuticorin
Tuticorin District
__________
Page  6  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 05:52:45 pm )

WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
P.VELMURUGAN, J.
AND
K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
AM
WA(MD) No. 1732 of 2026
28-10-2026
__________
Page  7  of  7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 02/11/2026 05:52:45 pm )