CONFEDERATION OF CENTRAL GOVT.
EMPLOYEES & WORKERS
The National Secretariat of the Confederation will meet, as intimated earlier at Chennai on 30th July 2011 at 11 AM. The venue of the meeting is as under.
4th Street, Sourastra Nagar,
Near Nagambakkam railway Station.
The comrades who will reaching Chennai may contact Com. M. Duraipandian or Com A Sundaram whose telephone No. are given under.
The women delegates who will attending the women Sub Committee meeting will be received at Chennai Central Station by host unit comrades. They may Contact incase of any difficulty Com Sundaran or Com.M.Duaripandian at the above telephone numbers.
KKN KuttySecretary General
The Madras High Court has directed the Union Government to frame a scheme like that of a one-time regularisation scheme of September 1993, to provide an opportunity of regular entry to 50 persons subject to their eligibility, qualification, if any and after relaxing the age bar and consider their case for regularization.
A Division Bench comprising Justices Elipe Dharma Rao and M. Venugopal passed the common order on petitions by the Centre challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) directing it to regularize the services of Rita Mary and 49 other casual labourers who were subsequently granted temporary status.
According to Ms. Mary, she was engaged as a casual labourer in December 1984 and posted to the Customs Preventive party, Thanjavur on monthly wages. In September 1993, the Centre by means of an official memo formulated a scheme for grant of temporary status to casual labourers. In February 1994, she was granted temporary status. However, at a later stage, the status was withdrawn and she was denied regularization. She moved the CAT which directed the government to grant regularization. Hence, the present writ petitions from the official authorities.
Disposing of the petitions, the Bench said the applicants had put in fairly a long spell of service. It had no hesitation to hold that denying them the temporary status and the consequent regularization was not a prudent and a fair practice (and that too when the Department of Personnel and Training in an office memorandum of September 10, 1993, framed a onetime regularization scheme.) Otherwise, it would amount to violating the tenor and spirit of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution, besides discrimination, arbitrariness and unreasonableness. Viewed in that perspective and also taking note of the overall assessment of facts and circumstances of the present case and in the interest of equality, fair play, good conscience and on humane consideration, the Bench said it was giving the direction to the authorities.
- The Hindu, Dated 23.07.2011