M.PRATHAP KUMAR, vs THE ENGINER IN CHIEF & CHIEF

WP No. 15101 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on 28.10.2026
Pronounced on 03.11.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WP No. 15101 of 2013
CNR: {HCMA011299312013}
M.Prathap Kumar,
NMR (Mazdoor Grade I)
S/o.Manikandan,
Vijaya House,
Near Ambala Convent
Thackalay.
..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Engineer in Chief & Chief
Engineer General, Building Constructions And
Maintenance, Public Works Department,
Chepauk, Chennai-5.
2. The Executive Engineer
Building Maintenance Sub Division PWD,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
3. Assistant Engineer,
Water Resource Organization, Pazhyar,
Nagercoil.
4. The Assistant Engineer,
Building Constructions and Maintenance
Division, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
..Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first
__________
Page1 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
respondent in Letter No.S4(1)/ 41196/2011-1 dated 03.01.2013 and to quash the
same and consequently direct the first respondent to regularize the service of the
petitioner in accordance to G.O.Ms.No.134 PW(C2) Department dated
07.05.2010.
For Petitioner: Mrs.Malarvizhi Udayakumar
For Respondent(s): Mr.C.P.Goutham, Govt. Advocate
RR1 to 4
ORDER
This petition has been filed seeking to quash the letter issued by the first
respondent in Letter No.S4(1)/ 41196/2011-1 dated 03.01.2013 and
consequently direct the first respondent to regularize the service of the
petitioner in accordance to G.O.Ms.No.134 PW(C2) Department dated
07.05.2010.
2. Case of the Petitioner:
i. The petitioner was working as Nominal Muster Roll (NMR) from the
year 1996 onwards without any break. The petitioner originally filed
W.P.No.14925 of 2011 before this Court for a mandamus to dispose of his
request for regularisation. The said writ petition was disposed of on 12.07.2011
with the following order:
__________
Page2 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
" In view of the limited prayer made during the hearing, this
writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the writ petitioner to
make a representation to the 4th respondent, seeking regularisation
of his services as per G.O.Ms.No.134, Public Works (C2)
Department, dated 07.05.2010, within two weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order and the 4th respondent is directed to
consider the same and pass orders within three months thereafter, on
merits and in accordance with law, taking into account
G.O.Ms.No.134, Public Works (C2) Department, dated 07.05.2010.
The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. Consequently,
M.P.No.1 of 2011 is closed. No costs."
ii. After the said order, the respondent did not take any action on the
petitioner's representation dated 08.08.2011, which necessitated issuance of
notice followed by Contempt Petition No.1699 of 2012. Only thereafter, the
respondent passed the impugned order dated 03.01.2013. The impugned order
reads as follows:
‘’In G.O.Ms.No.134, Public Works (C2) Department dated
07.05.2010, Government have regularized the services of NMRs
who have completed 10 years of service before 07.05.2010. Based
on the report received from the Executive Engineer, PWD,
Buildings (Construction & Maintenance) Division, Nagercoil,
NMR entries in the Service Book from 1996 to 2000, 2002 and
2003 in respect of petitioner are found to be false and also he has
stated that the petitioner was working as NMR w.e.f. 26.09.2000
only. The petitioner's period of services in NMR is as follows:
__________
Page3 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
Year No. of days
engaged as NMR
2000 45
2001 84
2004 109
2005 89
2006 78
2007 89
2008 112
2009 200
2010 319
2011 327
2012 81
Total 1533
Accordingly, he has completed 10 eligible years of NMR service
only on 31.12.2012 (i.e.) after 07.05.2010. After taking into
account G.O.Ms.No.134, PW (C2) Department dated 07.05.2010,
he has not completed 10 years of NMR service before 07.05.2010
and moreover the petitioner was not recruited through the
employment exchange also and he has not fulfilled the Statutory
Rules in respect of method of recruitment.
As stated supra, I am therefore, to inform that the claim for your
regularization is hereby rejected’’.
iii. The writ petitioner relies upon G.O.Ms.No.134, PWD (C2)
Department, dated 07.05.2010, which enables persons who have completed 10
years of service as on 07.05.2010 for regularisation. It is the further case of the
petitioner that he completed 10 years of service since he entered into service in
__________
Page4 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
the year 2000 and before 07.05.2010 the date of G.O., he completed 10 years as
on 07.05.2010, and hence he is entitled for regularisation as per the said G.O.
3. On the contrary, the respondent, without taking into account the years
2002 and 2003, rejected the petitioner's claim. Another reason stated is that the
petitioner completed his service on 31.12.2012. On that basis, petitioner
approached this Court for regularisation by invoking GO.No.134 dated
07.05.2010.
4. A detailed counter affidavit was filed to the writ petition by the 4th
respondent. The relevant portion at Para 7 reads as follows:
Entry made
Entry made in
Now
Considere
Now
Considere
in the
service book
the
service book
Year / Period
Service Status
d
Days
d
Vr. No.
1997
1.1.97 to 26.1.97 26 11ASE/1-97 Not worked
27.1.97 to 25.2.97 28 3 ASE/3-97 Not worked
26.2.97 to 25.3.97 27 23ASE/3-97 Not worked
1998
01.01.98 to 31.1.98 31 1PB/2-98 Not worked
01.02.98 to 28.2.98 28 18 PB/3-98 Not worked
01.03.98 to 31.03.98 30 231PB/3-98 Not worked
1999
01.01.99 to 31.1.99 31 61PB/2-99 Not worked
01.01.99 to 31.1.99 31 61PB/2-99 Not worked
01.02.99 to 28.2.99 28 15PB/3.99 Not worked
01.03.99 to 31.3.99 29 290PB/3.99 Not worked
01.04.99 to 30.04.99 30 24PB/5.99 Not worked
2000
01.01.2000 to
31 21PB/2-2000 Not worked
31.01.2000
Days
Vr. No.
01.02.2000 to
29 11PB/3.2000 Not worked
29.2.2000
1.03.2000 to
29 183PB/3.2000 Not worked
31.03.2000
26.9.2000 to 53Tky/11-
Worked 24
25.10.2000
2000
26.10.2000 to Worked 21 4Tky/12-
__________
Page5 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
Entry made
Entry made in
Now
Considere
Now
Considere
in the
service book
the
service book
Year / Period
Service Status
d
Days
d
Vr. No.
25.11.2000 2000
2001
26.3.2001 to 8Tky/5-
29 8Tky/5-2001 Worked 26
25.4.2001
Days
Vr. No.
2001
26.04.2001 to 2Tky/6-
28 1Tky/6-2001 Worked 27
25.5.2001
2001
26.5.2001 to 46Tky/7-
27 45Tky/7-2001 Worked 27
25.6.2001
2001
2002
26.5.2002 to
29 1Tky/7-2002 Not worked
25.6.2002
26.8.2002 to
28 17Tky/10-2002 Not worked
25.9.2002
26.9.2002 to
27 41Tky/10-2002 Not worked
25.10.2002
2003
26.5.2003 to
28 1Apm/7-2003 Not worked
25.06.2003
26.9.2003 to
29 4Apm/11-2003 Not worked
25.10.2003
26.10.2003 to
27 2Apm/12-2003 Not worked
25.11.2003
26.11.2003 to
29 2Apm/1-2004 Not worked
25.12.2003
2004
26.3.2004 to
26 1Apm/6-2004 Worked
25.5.2004
26.4.2004 to
27 2Apm/6-2004 Worked
25.6.2004
26.5.2004 to 2Apm/7-
- Worked 28
25.6.2004
2004
26.9.2004 to
28 2Apm/11-2004 Not worked
25.10.2004
26.10.2004 to
28 1Apm/12-2004 Worked
25.11.2004
2005
26.3.2005 to
29 1Apm/6-2005 Worked
25.4.2005
26.5.2005 to
29 2Apm/7-2005 Worked
25.6.2005
26.6.2005 to
26 4Apm/8-2005 Not worked
25.7.2005
26.11.2005 to
25 3Apm/1-2006 Worked
25.12.2005
26.12.2005 to
Worked
25.1.2006
2006
26.8.2006 to
29 13Apm/9-2006 Worked 29 1Apm/2-06
25.9.2006
26.9.2006 to
27 27Apm/10-2006 Not worked
25.10.2006
26.10.2006 to
29 10Apm/11-2006 Worked
25.11.2006
__________
Page6 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
Entry made
Entry made in
Now
Considere
Now
Considere
in the
service book
the
service book
Year / Period
Service Status
d
Days
d
Vr. No.
26.11.2006 to 21APM/12-
- Worked 28
25.12.2006
Days
Vr. No.
2006
2007
26.01.2007 to
28 2Apm/3-2007 Worked - Vr.No.
25.02.2007
26.03.2007 to
28 5Apm/6-2007 Not available - -
25.04.2007
26.04.2007 to
27 3Apm/6-2007 worked - -
25.05.2007
26.06.2007 to
28 10Apm/7-2007 Not available - -
25.07.2007
26.08.2007 to
28 11Apm/9-2007 worked - -
25.09.2007
26.11.2007 to
27 2Apm/1-2008 Not worked - -
25.12.2007
26.12.2007 to 1Apm/2-
worked 6
31.12.2008
2008
2008
01.01.2008 to 1Apm/2-
- - worked 22
28.01.2008
2008
26.02.2008 to
26 34Apm/3-2008 Not worked - -
25.03.2008
26.03.2008 to
28 7Tky/7-2008 Not worked - -
25.04.2008
26.04.2008 to
27 6Tky/7-2008 Not worked - -
25.05.2008
26.07.2008 to
28 49Bm/9-2008 worked - -
25.08.2008
26.08.2008 to
29 14Bm/9-2008 worked - -
25.09.2008
26.09.2008 to
27 24Bm/11-2008 worked - -
25.10.2008
26.11.2008 to
28 10Bm/1-2009 worked - -
25.12.2008
26.12.2008 to
30 3BM/2-2009 worked - -
25.01.2009
2009
26.01.2009 to
30 135BM/3-2009 worked - -
25.02.2009
26.02.2009 to
29 354BM/3-2009 worked - -
25.03.2009
26.03.2009 to
30 503BM/6-2009 Not available - -
25.04.2009
26.04.2009 to
28 51BM/6-2009 Not available - -
25.05.2009
26.05.2009 to
29 68BM/7-2009 Worked - -
25.06.2009
26.06.2009 to
29 94BM/8-2009 Worked - -
25.07.2009
26.07.2009 to
29 63BM/9-2009 Worked - -
25.08.2009
26.08.2009 to
29 79BM/10-2009 Not worked - -
25.09.2009
__________
Page7 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
Entry made
Entry made in
Now
Considere
Now
Considere
in the
service book
the
service book
Year / Period
Service Status
d
Days
d
Vr. No.
26.09.2009 to
27 67BM/11-2009 worked - -
25.10.2009
Days
Vr. No.
26.10.2009 to
28 76BM/12-2009 worked - -
25.11.2009
26.11.2009 to
28 80BM/1-2010 worked - -
25.12.2009
26.12.2009 to
29 71BM/2-2009 worked - -
25.01.2010
2010
26.01.2010 to
29 19BM/3-2010 worked - -
25.02.2010
26.02.2010 to
27 320BM/3-2010 worked - -
25.03.2010
26.03.2010 to
28 26BM/5-2010 worked - -
25.04.2010
26.04.2010 to
28 90BM/5-2010 worked - -
25.05.2010
Since the petitioner does not come under the eligibility criteria as
prescribed in the G.O., his claim for regularisation was rejected.
5. On the basis of the affidavit and counter, the matter was originally
heard and by order dated 31.07.2008, this Court dismissed the writ petition.
Aggrieved by the same, the writ petitioner filed W.A.No.88 of 2019. The Writ
Appeal was allowed on 26.08.2019 and the matter was remitted to the Writ
Court for fresh consideration. The relevant paragraphs in W.A.No.88 of 2019
are extracted hereunder:
‘’3. The relevant paragraphs of the covered judgment are
reproduced below :
__________
Page8 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
28. The scheme announced by the Government
Order in G.O.Ms.22, Personnel and Administrative
Reforms, dated 28 February 2006 was in the nature of a
benefit to those who have completed 10 years of regular
service. The Government has not taken away the right to
regularize the services subsequently. The Government, by
issuing the order in G.O.Ms.74, Personnnel and
Administrative Reforms (F) Department, dated 27 June
2013, made only an attempt to streamline the scheme
relating to regularization. The Government which is the
author of the earlier policy as found in G.O.Ms.22 dated
28 February 2006, is equally entitled to take a fresh
policy decision in supersession of the earlier policy. No
right would accrue to the employees to contend that the
policy announced by the Government earlier should
continue at all point of time. Further, this view taken by
the Government is in tune with the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.A.Nos.2726 to 2729 of 2014,
which arose from orders of this court. We are therefore of
the view that the learned single Judge was not justified in
quashing clause 6 of the Government Order in
G.O.Ms.74, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F)
Department, dated 27 June 2013.
29. The order passed by the learned single Judge
quashing clause 6 is set aside. The writ petitions are
remitted to the writ court for fresh consideration to
decide as to whether each of the respondents are eligible
for regularization in accordance with the order in
__________
Page9 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
G.O.Ms.74, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F)
Department, dated 27 June 2013, or any other relevant
Government Orders governing the matter. The individual
cases must be decided on merits, taking into account the
nature of service and the period of such service.
4. Accordingly, by following the judgment dated 16 August 2019
in W.A.No.2875 of 2018 etc. batch, the matter is remitted to
the writ court to decide the eligibility of the appellant for
regularization in accordance with the relevant Government
Orders.’’
After remand, the matter is listed for final hearing.
Submissions:
6. Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the Government Advocate for
the respondent.
7. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is covered
under G.O.Ms.No.134 dated 07.05.2010, since he has completed 10 years of
continuous service and the same was not properly considered in the impugned
order. To substantiate the same, the counsel placed reliance on the
communication dated 26.04.2012 of the Assistant Executive Engineer,
Buildings (Construction & Maintenance) Division, Nagarcoil, to the Assistant
Executive Engineer, Water Resources Organisation, Vazhaiyar Dam, Nagercoil
__________
Page10 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
Sub-Division, dated 26.04.2012, calling for details regarding the service of the
writ petitioner. In response to the said communication, the Assistant Engineer,
vide letter dated 14.05.2012, confirmed that the petitioner had completed 10
years of service. Once the Assistant Engineer has already confirmed 10 years of
service, the same cannot be rejected by way of the impugned order. Furthermore
G.O.Ms.No.134 is squarely in favour of the petitioner. The counsel also relied
upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sukendu Bhattacharjee and others
Vs State of Assam and Others in C.A.No.4514 of 2025 dated 21.05.2026 (2026
INSC 523). The relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:
‘’77. Applying these principles to the present case, it is
evident that engaging workers on muster rolls was a consistently
employed policy of the State which continued for prolonged period
of time. The appellants were not engaged for sporadic or seasonal
purposes but were taken on muster rolls and have rendered
continuous service for decades in departments performing regular
governmental functions. The State itself acknowledged the
magnitude of the issue and framed a Cabinet policy to regularize
similarly situated workers, acting upon it in respect of nearly
30,000 employees. In such circumstances, to deny consideration to
the fraction of remaining eligible workers including the
appellants, by taking shelter under a rigid reading of Umadevi
(supra) would defeat the very principles of fairness and non-
arbitrariness that this Court has consistently upheld.’’
__________
Page11 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
8. The counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the Full Bench judgment
of this Court in W.P.No.23823 of 2023 dated 26.02.2024 and prayed for
allowing the writ petition.
9. Per contra, the counsel for the respondent submitted that the writ
petitioner has not completed 10 years of service and therefore, G.O.Ms.No.134
is not applicable to the case of the petitioner. The impugned order is perfectly
legal and does not warrant interference. He prayed for dismissal of the writ
petition.
Discussion and Finding:
10. From the records and the affidavit filed by the petitioner, the
petitioner claims that he joined service in 1996. However, no material recorded
from the year1996 has been produced. On the other hand, the respondent in the
counter affidavit has extracted the period of service of the writ petitioner.
11. The Assistant Engineer sent a communication to the Assistant
Engineer, Buildings on 14.05.2012, which is extracted hereunder:
__________
Page12 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
12. Subsequently, another communication was sent by the Assistant
Engineer, (Buildings) to the Superintending Engineer, dated 15.05.2012. The
same is as follows:
__________
Page13 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
__________
Page14 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
13. From the above said communications, it is evident that the official
records indicate more than 10 years of service. The communication is of the
year 2012. Despite the said communications, the respondent passed an order
rejecting the request of the writ petitioner by relying upon certain data that the
petitioner worked as NMR only from 26.09.2000. The respondent has not
produced any material to substantiate the said data, which has been relied upon.
__________
Page15 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
14. This Court finds that before passing the impugned order, the
respondent has not considered the communications dated 14.05.2012 and
15.05.2012 and has not assigned any reason as to why the said communications
were disbelieved. This creates a cloud of doubt over the impugned order and the
same has to be addressed by the respondent.
Conclusion:
15. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated 03.01.2013
passed by the first respondent is set aside and the matter is remitted to the first
respondent for fresh consideration, taking into account the communications
dated 14.05.2012 and 15.05.2012, and to pass appropriate orders within a period
of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, on merits and in
accordance with law.
16. With the above observation and direction, the Writ Petition is
allowed. No costs.
-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
rli
__________
Page16 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )

WP No. 15101 of 2013
KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J.
rli
1. The Engineer In Chief & Chief
Engineer General, Building Constructions
andMaintenance, Public Works Department,
Chepauk, Chennai-5
2. The Executive Engineer
Building Maintenance Sub Division PWD,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
3. Assistant Engineer, Water Resource Organisation,
Pachyar, Nagercoil.
4. The Assistant Engineer,
Building Constructions And Maintenance Division, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District
Pre-delivery order in
WP No. 15101 of 2013
-11-2026
__________
Page17 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/11/2026 01:27:06 pm )