Referring to the Madras High Court order on July 19 to the ADMK government to consider creating posts in the name of Makkal Nala Paniyalargal or in any other name to sensitise the people to the evils of liquor consumption or accommodate in vacancies in government schools, panchayats, municipalities, corporations, village/taluk/collector offices, undertakings of the Government of Tamil Nadu or in any post as may be created for implementing new schemes, DMK President Kalaignar said the people of the State knew well the reputation of the ADMK regime among government employees and hence it is good for them and the State that they honour the court verdict and conduct with humanitarianism without again venturing to go on appeal against the judgement.
In his epistle to cadre on August 21, Kalaignar said 13,500 of these workers were appointed during the DMK rule on 2.7.1990 in order to provide employment opportunities to unemployed youth. Only for the reason that they were appointed by the DMK rule, immediately after the ADMK government took over in 1991, they sent out those workers on 31.5.1991. After the DMK again captured power in 1996, they were again re-inducted in service.
After the ADMK regime again retrenched them in 2001, when he assumed as Chief Minister for the fifth time in 2006, the workers were again provided job on 31.5.2006. Again as before the ADMK regime sacked them by a GO on 8.11.2011. The union of the workers filed a petition in the Madras High Court against their retrenchment and Justice K. Suguna ordered an interim stay.
Then on Nov.21, 2011 Justice K.Suguna directed the State government to reinstate all the sacked workers. The government through its counsel made a mention before the First Bench that the State wanted to file an appeal against the Single judge order and was asked to file a petition. On Nov.23, 2011 the First Bench comprising Chief Justice M.Y.Iqbal and Justice T.S.Sivagnanam dismissed the appeal and reiterated the stand of the single judge order over reinstating the workers. The judges said that the government should not treat the workers in such a manner whenever it comes to power.
Maintaining that the Tamil Nadu government before removing welfare workers from service should have given them an opportunity to be heard, the Madras High Court said the records “reveal appointment and ouster of these employees were done at the whims of the governments”.
Holding that the single judge had rightly passed the interim order, the bench said it appeared from the record that employees of Tamil Nadu Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Munnettra Sangam and Dindigul Mavatta Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Nala Sangam were initially appointed in 1990 on a consolidated monthly pay of Rs 200 and were removed in 1991 due to change of the government. The judges pointed out that with the change of government every five years the workers were reappointed and removed. Counsel for the ‘sangams’ produced a letter dated November 21, 2011 issued by the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Commissioner to all district collectors to allow those MNPs whose names were furnished to the High Court to attend office in keeping with the court’s direction.
Yet another blow for the ruling party and justice to the public prevailed, irrespective of their party affiliation. Because livelihood is an essential component for survival, even as the sacking orders reached, the workers were distressed and some attempted to end their lives. But then they rejoiced with the court reiterating to reinstate.
Again on Nov.24 when the issue compliance of the interim order of Nov.21 came up before the Single judge, the State Advocate General informed the court that the government had filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court against the dismissal of its plea challenging the stay. However, counsel for MNPs, R.Vaigai said the SLP was against the interim order and hence the final arguments on the petitions could be continued. The AG said, “We are ready to face anything” after which Vaigai commenced her arguments on the petitions. “What is happening in your State?” the bench of Justice DK Jain and Justice AR Dave felt that with every change of government in the state, the employees seem to be at the receiving end.
“What is happening in the state? Is there any rule of law in the state? There should be some rule of law”. Justice Jain told AAG, “Every five years you [State] appoint them. Thereafter, you remove them, again appoint them. Is there not a rule of law, there must be some rule of law in the State.” Senior counsel T.R. Andhyarujina, appearing for the associations, told the court that this was happening every time there was change of government. The AAG submitted, “Since the main writ petition was being heard today (Nov.29), we are not pressing this SLP at present. Let it be listed in the normal course. We will dispel the wrong impression created.” The Bench then posted the SLP for hearing on December 12, 2012.
But contrary to what the AAG told the Supreme Court the main writ petition which came for hearing before Justice K.Suguna in the Madras High Court on Nov.29, the counsel for the government sought adjournment as the Advocate General was otherwise engaged and could not make his submission in the court. Thereafter, every time the Judge posted hearing on some other date, the government counsel came with the same excuse pleading for adjournment. Ultimately on Dec.15, the infuriated Judge asked the government counsel why they were dragging the case of poor contract workers like this and strictly directed that the Advocate General should be present without fail on the next day (Dec.16), to complete hearing in the case. The counsel for workers’ associations R.Vaigai said the government was protracting the case because their case was weak.
Finally, the Supreme Court on Nov12, 2013 questioned the Madras High Court for disposing of the petitions relating to the sacking of 13,000 Makkal Nala Paniyalargal (welfare workers) accepting the compromise arrived at between the union office-bearer and the Tamil Nadu Government. A Bench of Justices Anil R. Dave and Dipak Misra, after hearing senior counsel T.R. Andhyarujina for the petitioners and senior counsel Rakesh Diwedi for the State, set aside the compromise order and asked the High Court to take up the matter afresh and decide the question of termination of the workers on merits in six months.
The appeal was filed by the Tamil Nadu Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Munnetra Sangam against a judgment of the Madras High Court disposing of the appeal accepting a compromise entered into by the erstwhile general secretary with the State government to pay five months salary to the terminated workers. On behalf of the sangam, it was submitted that 13,000 welfare workers were sacked in November 2011 by the ADMK government and the High Court single judge had recorded a finding that the dismissal was for political reasons. It said the workers were appointed in 1989 pursuant to a scheme formulated by the then government to help educated unemployed by prescribing tenth standard as the educational qualification for the post. They were removed when the ADMK government came to power, again re-employed then sacked and again re-employed. The sangam said the High Court ought not to have accepted the compromise entered into by the erstwhile secretary of the sangam Palani. It also drew the court’s attention to an order passed by the present government to recruit ADMK party men for the same posts. The sangam also said after the impugned judgment 15 workers had committed suicide. These workers had been robbed of their, tenure, their aspirations and future. They had become the helpless victims of certain swift moves on the political chess board.
The sangam said “The sole reason is that whenever the ADMK comes to power the poor workers become a playful toy in its hands and are kicked out from the jobs as it is the other political party (DMK) who had conceived and given employment to unemployed youths numbering to 13000. Therefore these workers have been victims of political chess board for the past 23 years and the present government disbanded their services. The sangam prayed for a direction to quash the April 26, 2012, judgment and the order dismissing the review petition.
It was on this directive that the Madras High Court bench on Aug 19 directed it to consider creating posts in the name of Makkal Nala Paniyalargal (village-level workers) or in any other name to sensitise the people to the evils of liquor consumption. There was a twist to the roller coaster fortunes of more than 13,000 Makkal Nala Paniyalargal (public welfare workers) witnessed a twist on the day. They can be accommodated in vacancies in government schools, panchayats, municipalities, corporations, village/taluk/collector offices, undertakings of the Government of Tamil Nadu or in any post as may be created for implementing new schemes, ruled a division bench comprising Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice M Satyanarayana.
If this is not possible, the workers who were thrown out of job should be accommodated in vacancies in government schools, local bodies, taluk offices, the Collectorates, various other government offices and government-owned undertakings, or in posts created for implementing new schemes in the 2014-15 budget, according to their qualification without reference to their age.
The Division Bench of Justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and M. Sathyanarayanan said the exercise should commence immediately and be completed by October 31. If any of the eligible workers could not be accommodated, the government should pay the last drawn salary from November 1 this year till they were accommodated in any post.
It is three and a half years since the ADMK assumed power and without providing jobs to these workers wasting all these years, the regime harassed them by appealing up to the apex court, Kalaignar noted and said at least after all these developments, the ADMK regime should not further delay as already 19 workers had committed suicide and most of them were from the Dalit and backward and most backward communities. The government should come forward to provide them jobs immediately. There could not be more cruelty or injustice if the regime again tried to appeal with the motive of delaying for the only reason that they were appointed by the DMK rule. Kalaignar said the people of the State knew well the reputation of the ADMK regime among government employees and hence it is good for them and the State that they honour the court verdict and conduct with humanitarianism without again venturing to go on appeal against the judgement.
In his epistle to cadre on August 21, Kalaignar said 13,500 of these workers were appointed during the DMK rule on 2.7.1990 in order to provide employment opportunities to unemployed youth. Only for the reason that they were appointed by the DMK rule, immediately after the ADMK government took over in 1991, they sent out those workers on 31.5.1991. After the DMK again captured power in 1996, they were again re-inducted in service.
After the ADMK regime again retrenched them in 2001, when he assumed as Chief Minister for the fifth time in 2006, the workers were again provided job on 31.5.2006. Again as before the ADMK regime sacked them by a GO on 8.11.2011. The union of the workers filed a petition in the Madras High Court against their retrenchment and Justice K. Suguna ordered an interim stay.
Then on Nov.21, 2011 Justice K.Suguna directed the State government to reinstate all the sacked workers. The government through its counsel made a mention before the First Bench that the State wanted to file an appeal against the Single judge order and was asked to file a petition. On Nov.23, 2011 the First Bench comprising Chief Justice M.Y.Iqbal and Justice T.S.Sivagnanam dismissed the appeal and reiterated the stand of the single judge order over reinstating the workers. The judges said that the government should not treat the workers in such a manner whenever it comes to power.
Maintaining that the Tamil Nadu government before removing welfare workers from service should have given them an opportunity to be heard, the Madras High Court said the records “reveal appointment and ouster of these employees were done at the whims of the governments”.
Holding that the single judge had rightly passed the interim order, the bench said it appeared from the record that employees of Tamil Nadu Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Munnettra Sangam and Dindigul Mavatta Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Nala Sangam were initially appointed in 1990 on a consolidated monthly pay of Rs 200 and were removed in 1991 due to change of the government. The judges pointed out that with the change of government every five years the workers were reappointed and removed. Counsel for the ‘sangams’ produced a letter dated November 21, 2011 issued by the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Commissioner to all district collectors to allow those MNPs whose names were furnished to the High Court to attend office in keeping with the court’s direction.
Yet another blow for the ruling party and justice to the public prevailed, irrespective of their party affiliation. Because livelihood is an essential component for survival, even as the sacking orders reached, the workers were distressed and some attempted to end their lives. But then they rejoiced with the court reiterating to reinstate.
Again on Nov.24 when the issue compliance of the interim order of Nov.21 came up before the Single judge, the State Advocate General informed the court that the government had filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court against the dismissal of its plea challenging the stay. However, counsel for MNPs, R.Vaigai said the SLP was against the interim order and hence the final arguments on the petitions could be continued. The AG said, “We are ready to face anything” after which Vaigai commenced her arguments on the petitions. “What is happening in your State?” the bench of Justice DK Jain and Justice AR Dave felt that with every change of government in the state, the employees seem to be at the receiving end.
“What is happening in the state? Is there any rule of law in the state? There should be some rule of law”. Justice Jain told AAG, “Every five years you [State] appoint them. Thereafter, you remove them, again appoint them. Is there not a rule of law, there must be some rule of law in the State.” Senior counsel T.R. Andhyarujina, appearing for the associations, told the court that this was happening every time there was change of government. The AAG submitted, “Since the main writ petition was being heard today (Nov.29), we are not pressing this SLP at present. Let it be listed in the normal course. We will dispel the wrong impression created.” The Bench then posted the SLP for hearing on December 12, 2012.
But contrary to what the AAG told the Supreme Court the main writ petition which came for hearing before Justice K.Suguna in the Madras High Court on Nov.29, the counsel for the government sought adjournment as the Advocate General was otherwise engaged and could not make his submission in the court. Thereafter, every time the Judge posted hearing on some other date, the government counsel came with the same excuse pleading for adjournment. Ultimately on Dec.15, the infuriated Judge asked the government counsel why they were dragging the case of poor contract workers like this and strictly directed that the Advocate General should be present without fail on the next day (Dec.16), to complete hearing in the case. The counsel for workers’ associations R.Vaigai said the government was protracting the case because their case was weak.
Finally, the Supreme Court on Nov12, 2013 questioned the Madras High Court for disposing of the petitions relating to the sacking of 13,000 Makkal Nala Paniyalargal (welfare workers) accepting the compromise arrived at between the union office-bearer and the Tamil Nadu Government. A Bench of Justices Anil R. Dave and Dipak Misra, after hearing senior counsel T.R. Andhyarujina for the petitioners and senior counsel Rakesh Diwedi for the State, set aside the compromise order and asked the High Court to take up the matter afresh and decide the question of termination of the workers on merits in six months.
The appeal was filed by the Tamil Nadu Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Munnetra Sangam against a judgment of the Madras High Court disposing of the appeal accepting a compromise entered into by the erstwhile general secretary with the State government to pay five months salary to the terminated workers. On behalf of the sangam, it was submitted that 13,000 welfare workers were sacked in November 2011 by the ADMK government and the High Court single judge had recorded a finding that the dismissal was for political reasons. It said the workers were appointed in 1989 pursuant to a scheme formulated by the then government to help educated unemployed by prescribing tenth standard as the educational qualification for the post. They were removed when the ADMK government came to power, again re-employed then sacked and again re-employed. The sangam said the High Court ought not to have accepted the compromise entered into by the erstwhile secretary of the sangam Palani. It also drew the court’s attention to an order passed by the present government to recruit ADMK party men for the same posts. The sangam also said after the impugned judgment 15 workers had committed suicide. These workers had been robbed of their, tenure, their aspirations and future. They had become the helpless victims of certain swift moves on the political chess board.
The sangam said “The sole reason is that whenever the ADMK comes to power the poor workers become a playful toy in its hands and are kicked out from the jobs as it is the other political party (DMK) who had conceived and given employment to unemployed youths numbering to 13000. Therefore these workers have been victims of political chess board for the past 23 years and the present government disbanded their services. The sangam prayed for a direction to quash the April 26, 2012, judgment and the order dismissing the review petition.
It was on this directive that the Madras High Court bench on Aug 19 directed it to consider creating posts in the name of Makkal Nala Paniyalargal (village-level workers) or in any other name to sensitise the people to the evils of liquor consumption. There was a twist to the roller coaster fortunes of more than 13,000 Makkal Nala Paniyalargal (public welfare workers) witnessed a twist on the day. They can be accommodated in vacancies in government schools, panchayats, municipalities, corporations, village/taluk/collector offices, undertakings of the Government of Tamil Nadu or in any post as may be created for implementing new schemes, ruled a division bench comprising Justice N Paul Vasanthakumar and Justice M Satyanarayana.
If this is not possible, the workers who were thrown out of job should be accommodated in vacancies in government schools, local bodies, taluk offices, the Collectorates, various other government offices and government-owned undertakings, or in posts created for implementing new schemes in the 2014-15 budget, according to their qualification without reference to their age.
The Division Bench of Justices N. Paul Vasanthakumar and M. Sathyanarayanan said the exercise should commence immediately and be completed by October 31. If any of the eligible workers could not be accommodated, the government should pay the last drawn salary from November 1 this year till they were accommodated in any post.
It is three and a half years since the ADMK assumed power and without providing jobs to these workers wasting all these years, the regime harassed them by appealing up to the apex court, Kalaignar noted and said at least after all these developments, the ADMK regime should not further delay as already 19 workers had committed suicide and most of them were from the Dalit and backward and most backward communities. The government should come forward to provide them jobs immediately. There could not be more cruelty or injustice if the regime again tried to appeal with the motive of delaying for the only reason that they were appointed by the DMK rule. Kalaignar said the people of the State knew well the reputation of the ADMK regime among government employees and hence it is good for them and the State that they honour the court verdict and conduct with humanitarianism without again venturing to go on appeal against the judgement.
No comments:
Post a Comment