Date:13/03/2007 URL: http://www.thehindu.com/2007/03/13/stories/2007031304600400.htm

Tamil Nadu - Chennai

Jobs for transport staff who were not appointed

Special Correspondent

Government gives undertaking to High Court hearing writ petitions

CHENNAI : The Tamil Nadu Government has decided to appoint some 2,000 bus drivers and conductors selected, but not appointed, by the previous Government, the Madras High Court was informed on Monday.

Advocate-General R. Viduthalai made the statement when a batch of writ appeals filed by persons aggrieved by a single judge's order as well as the Government's decision to appoint only those who lost jobs due to retrenchment drives since 1997, came up before a Division Bench comprising Justice S.K. Mukhopadhaya and Justice R. Sudhakar.

Recording the statement, the Bench said, "The Advocate-General has submitted that he discussed the matter with the Minister concerned and the Managing Director of the Transport Corporation. They have agreed to appoint the appellants and other similarly situated persons, who were retrenched pursuant to a Government Order date July 21, 2005, subject to them fulfilling certain conditions."

According to Mr. Viduthalai's undertaking, those who are qualified, physically fit and having valid driving licence would be accorded priority in appointment to vacancies existing after accommodating the retrenched employees.

Making it clear that persons not possessing the mandatory qualifications would not be considered for appointment, the Advocate-General said, `after completing the process of selection of 2005 panel, steps would be taken to fill up the posts for fresh appointments in accordance to 2006 year panel."

Originally, the writ petitions were filed by hundreds of workmen who lost their jobs in retrenchment drives since 1997. They had also challenged the previous Government's move to employ over 2,000 drivers and conductors in February 2006. Appointment orders, however, could not be issued to them in view of the Assembly elections. Later, in July 2006, the present Government issued the impugned orders stating that retrenched employees were entitled to preferential treatment. The batch of writ petitions was filed by those who were selected during the previous regime.

A single judge, upholding the orders issued of the present Government, said Transport Corporations were bound to give re-employment to those who were earlier employed in these Corporations and retrenched from service. Assailing the ruling, several writ appeals were filed by persons selected but whom the previous Government could not appoint. They wanted the court to direct the Transport Corporations to appoint them in the remaining vacancies after providing re-employment to retrenched workmen.