Madras High Court
WA/250/2024 of THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU Vs A.MOHAMMED SHARIFF on 8 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WA No. 250 of 2024 AND
CMP NO. 1551 OF 2024
1. The Government Of Tamilnadu
Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Handlooms, Handicrafts, Textiles and Khadi(G1)
Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Commissioner Of Sericulture
Foulkes Compound, Animedu, Salem-638 001.
3. The Assistant Director
Sericulture Department, Thalavadi.
..Appellants
Vs
A.Mohammed Shariff
S/o.Abdulla Shariff, Junior Inspector of Sericulture, Panakahalli Post, Talavadi(Via), Erode District-638 461.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer : Writ Appeal under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to set aside the order dated 11.07.2022 made in WP.No.6426 of 2016.
For Appellant(s):
Ms.Y.Kavitha,
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent(s):
Mr. R.S. Anandan
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Judgment
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) State preferred the present writ appeal challenging the writ order dated 11.07.2022 passed in W.P.No.6426 of 2016.
2. The respondent was appointed as Casual Labourer in the year 1980 and was regularly appointed as Junior Inspector of Sericulture with effect from 09.04.1988. He continued in the regular establishment therefrom. However, the respondent had not passed Tamil language test within the timeline prescribed. Rule 12A(b) of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules. Thus, the respondent was discharged from the post on 04.06.1993. After passing the Tamil Language Test in May 1996, respondent was re-appointed into Government Service by G.O.Ms.No.156, Handlooms, Handicrafts, Textiles and Khadi Department dated 25.07.1997. The Government Order was issued on condition that he will be treated as fresh appointee on direct recruitment and his seniority would be counted only from his date of re- appointment. He continued in service as such.
3. However, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Government issued another Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.229, Handlooms, Handicrafts, Textiles and Khadi Department dated 01.11.2022 relaxing the Rule 12A in favour of 14 employees and their probation was declared with effect from the date on which they have passed the Tamil Test with service benefits. In this regard, learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that, unlike the respondent herein, other persons were not discharged from service and therefore they were granted the benefit of rule relaxation by the Government.
4. Such an argument deserves no merit consideration since all the employees have not passed the Tamil Test and in respect of other employees, the Government issued order granting the benefit by relaxing the Rules. That being so, there is no acceptable reason to discriminate the case of the respondent herein. However, the respondent cannot claim salary or other monetary benefits for the period he was not in Government service. The said position has been clarified by the Writ Court that the respondent would not be entitled to receive monetary benefits during the period from 04.06.1996 to 07.10.1997, when he had not actually worked in the department. Therefore, monetary benefit has not been granted to the respondent for the period during which he was not in service. In respect of other benefits relating to relaxation of rules, declaration of probation and other consequential benefits as ordered in favour of similarly placed employees in G.O.Ms.No.229 dated 01.11.2022 as extended in favour of the respondent, which has been rightly considered by the Writ Court.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN J. KST
5. Therefore, no further intervention is required in the writ order impugned dated 11.07.2022 made in W.P.No.6426 of 2016. The writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.) 08-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KST WA No. 250 of 2024 AND CMP NO. 1551 OF 2024