W.P.(MD) No.17573 of 2018 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Reserved On : 01.08.2025 Pronounced On : 22.08.2025 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.D. MARIA CLETE W.P. (MD) No.17573 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD)No.15433 of 2018 R.Pandian, S/o. V.Ramachandran, lA, Palanichamy Compound, Bharathiarpuram, Chokkampatti, Melur-625 106, Madurai District. ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Joint Director, O/o. The Joint Director of Agriculture, Tallakulam, Madurai. 2. The Assistant Director of Agriculture, Melur, Madurai District. ... Respondents PRAYER in W.P.: To issue a a Writ of Certiorarifed Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 1st respondent in connection with impugned order of rejection passed by him in his proceedings in No. Pani4/ 8841/2017 dated 18.07.2018 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to 1/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.17573 of 2018 discharge his duty as Jeep Driver in the 2nd respondent office within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Hon’ble Court and pass such further or other orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances ofthe case and thus render justice. PRAYER in WMP: To grant ad-interim direction, directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to discharge his duty as Jeep Driver in the 2nd respondent office till the disposal of the writ petition. APPEARANCE OF PARTIES: For Petitioner : Mr. Shaazim Shangar, Advocate for Mr.Ashaiq Ismail, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok, Additional Government Pleader J U D G M E N T Heard. 2. The Petitioner in this writ petition was appointed as a Jeep Driver on a daily wage basis in the office of the 2nd Respondent on 07.10.2014, and his appointment was renewed periodically. He was assigned to drive the jeep bearing Registration No. TN 59 G 1084. According to the Petitioner, his services were abruptly stopped on 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.17573 of 2018 22.12.2017. Consequently, he filed W.P.(MD) No. 4184 of 2018 seeking permission to continue discharging his duties as a Jeep Driver. When the writ petition came up for admission, the 1st Respondent informed the Court that a termination order had already been passed against the Petitioner on 01.06.2017. In view of this submission, the writ petition was dismissed, granting liberty to the Petitioner to challenge the termination order in the manner known to law. 3. Subsequently, the Petitioner filed W.P.(MD) No. 9570 of 2018 challenging the order of termination. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court by order dated 27.04.2018, wherein the Court issued the following direction:— “8.1. The petitioner’s representations dated 21.12.2017 as well as 10.01.2018 shall be considered by the respondent by taking into account that the similarly placed adhoc Drivers, who were also terminated or their services have been dispensed with along with the petitioner since have been taken back for job by the respondent’s office and considering the request of the petitioner also as he has set out in his representations referred to above and pass orders thereon on merits and in accordance with law with regard to his re-engagement to the said job on par with other similarly placed persons, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.17573 of 2018 4. In pursuance of the above, the 1st Respondent passed the impugned order dated 18.07.2018. The order recorded that the Petitioner was engaged only on a temporary and daily-rated basis, and that his services could be dispensed with at any time if his performance was found unsatisfactory. It was further stated that his work was not satisfactory, and that he had been involved in an accident, leading to apprehension among the officers to travel in the jeep driven by him. Consequently, the 2nd Respondent had stopped assigning him work with effect from 21.12.2017 and duly informed the higher authorities. In light of these circumstances, his request was declined. 5. The Petitioner contended that having rendered service for a period of 3 ½ years, he ought not to be denied employment and, therefore, the order passed by the Respondent was liable to be interfered with. However, in the appointment order dated 07.10.2014, issued to the Petitioner along with seven others, it was clearly stipulated as follows:— “Nkw;fz;lthW epakpf;fg;gLk; ,yF thfd Xl;Leh; gzp jw;fhypfkhdJ. ,jid itj;J gzpepakdk; NfhUtjw;F chpikAilatuy;yh;. gzpf;;F tuhj ehl;fSf;F rk;gsk; toq;fg;gl khl;lhJ. gzpahshpd; gzpapy; jpUg;jp ,y;iynadpy; Kd;dwptpg;gpd;wp gzpapypUe;J tpyf;fTk; fPNo ifnahg;gkpl;ltUf;F mjpfhuk; cs;sJ vdTk; njhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ. 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.17573 of 2018 ,g;gzpahdJ nraw; nghwpahsh; (Ntshz;ik nghwpapay;) kJiu mth;fs; jw;fhypf Xl;Leh;fis epakpf;Fk; tiu my;yJ mf;Nlhgh; 2015> ,jpy; vJ Kd;dNjh mJtiu vd;w tptuk; njhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ.” 5. In light of the foregoing discussion, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Consequently, the W.M.P. (MD) is also dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. 22.08.2025 Index: Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-speaking Order Neutral Citation : Yes / No LS To 1. The Joint Director, O/o. The Joint Director of Agriculture, Tallakulam, Madurai. 2. The Assistant Director of Agriculture, Melur, Madurai District. 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.17573 of 2018 DR. A.D. MARIA CLETE, J. LS Pre-delivery Judgment made in W.P. (MD) No.17573 of 2018 22.08.2025 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis