Madras High Court
WP/44577/2025 of T.MINMINI Vs THE REGISTRAR on 24 August 2026
WP No. 44577 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24-08-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WP No. 44577 of 2025
and
WMP Nos.49730 & 49732 of 2025
T.Minmini
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The Registrar
District Judiciary,
High Court Of Madras,
Chennai-104.
2. The Principal District Judge
Tiruvannamalai District,
Tiruvannamalai.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st respondent made in Official Memorandum in R.O.C/No.31701/2025/C1 dated 26.08.2025
and the consequential order of the 2nd Respondent made in Official Memorandum in Dis. No.4863/A/2025 dated 18.09.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant maternity leave for the petitioner on the basis of petitioner’s application dated 22.01.2025 for the period of 270 days.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr.G.JEREMIAH
For Respondent(s):
MR. S. GIRIDHARAN
WP No. 44577 of 2025
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.
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings dated 26.08.2025 and 18.09.2025 declining the request of the writ petitioner to grant maternity leave based on her application dated 22.01.2025.
2. The writ petitioner was admittedly appointed as Computer Operator on temporary basis under a scheme to digitalize the Court records. The appointment was made under Rule 16 (a) (i) of the Tamil Nadu Judicial Ministerial Service. She continued to be a temporary employee and therefore, the benefits applicable to the regular employees cannot be extended to the temporary employees.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner was periodically ousted from service and permitted to join again as a fresh employee on temporary basis.
4. May that as it be, a concession has already been given to the petitioner that after delivery, at any point of time, she may report for duty and in such circumstances, the learned Principal District Judge may engage her as temporary employee in the same capacity.
WP No. 44577 of 2025
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr.G.Jeremiah would submit that after delivering the child, the writ petitioner had already joined in the temporary post of Computer Operator. Therefore, the benefit of medical leave available to the regular employees cannot be extended to the temporary employees appointed under Rule 16 (a)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Judicial Ministerial Service. Since the concession of rejoining the duty has already been granted and the writ petitioner also availed the said concession, no further deliberation is required with reference to the claim set out by the writ petitioner. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.) 24-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SLI To
1. The Registrar District Judiciary, High Court Of Madras, Chennai-104.
2. The Principal District Judge Tiruvannamalai District, Tiruvannamalai.
WP No. 44577 of 2025
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J. SLI WP No. 44577 of 2025 24-08-2026