/585/2026 of THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU Vs M. NARAYANASAMY
WA No. 585 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07-04-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR
and
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR
WA No. 585 of 2026
and
CMP No. 5574 of 2026
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Additional Chief Secretary,
Environment and Forests Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests
(Head of Forest Force), Velachery Main Road,
Guindy, Chennai-600032
..Appellant(s)
Vs
M. Narayanasamy
W/o.Manirathinam,
Forest Guard, (Retired),
No.7/46, Pillaiyar Koil Street,
Devika Puram Post,
Chetpet Taluk,
Tiruvannamalai District
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Appeal filed under clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order
dated 03.08.2023 made in WP.No. 21915 of 2023.
__________
Page1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA No. 585 of 2026
For Appellant(s): Mr.R.Neethiperumal
Government Advocate
For Respondent(s): -
Judgment
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.Senthilkumar J.)
This intra court appeal is directed against the order passed by the W rit
Court dated 03.08.2023 made in W.P.No.21915 of 2023, which was disposed of
vide a common order involving a batch of similar petitions.
2.In view of the order that is going to be passed in this Appeal at t he
admission stage, notice to the respondent is dispensed with.
3.The respondent/writ petitioner was appointed as a Plot Watcher on
01.10.1980 on daily wage basis. Although the petitioner’s name was included
in the State Wide Seniority lists drawn up by the Department i n 1994 and 1999,
the same was not followed properly was his case. The primary gr ievance of the
petitioner was that while his service was regularized only afte r a period of 28
years, his juniors, specifically one Mr.P. Karuppiah was brought into the regular
time scale as early as 24.01.1995.
__________
Page2 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA No. 585 of 2026
4.Similarly placed persons, viz., P.Sundaram, P.Govindan and 23 others
filed W.P.Nos.15561 of 2006 and 23374 of 2008 before this Court and the same
was disposed on 10.03.2008 and 30.10.2009 with a direction to consider their
claim for appointment as Forest Watchers on par with their juniors. The
Department filed Appeals in W.A.Nos.690 of 2008 and 607 of 2010 against the
above said orders and the same were dismissed by the Hon’ble Division Be nch
of this Court on 13.10.2009 and 29.03.2010 respectively. Subsequently, the
department implemented the order of this court vide orders dated 15.11.2010
and 07.01.2010.
5.The Government came out with a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.64,
Environment and Forest (FR2) Department dated 08.03.1999 for preparation of
statewide seniority for all Social Forestry Workers and Plot Watche rs for the
purpose of regularisation. Thereafter, G.O.(2D) No.122, Environment, Climat e
Change and Forest (FR.2(ii)) Department dated 12.08.2022, was issued in
pursuant to the order of this Court in W.P.No.19020 of 2021 for regularising
services of similarly placed persons. In light of the above said order s, insofar as
the respondent / writ petitioner is concerned, such a gesture has not been shown.
__________
Page3 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA No. 585 of 2026
Therefore, the writ petitioner approached the authorities to seek for such a
benefit, which was not considered and hence the writ petitioner approa ched the
writ court seeking regularization of service for pensionary benefits.
6.The writ court allowed the said writ petition directing the appe llants
herein to consider the case of the petitioner in light of the above said
Government order and to grant him the same benefits as the similarl y placed
persons.
7.Aggrieved over the same this Writ Appeal has been filed. Regarding the
issue of Regularisation of the Plot Watchers who have rendered decades of
service, we are of the view that it is no longer res integra, as numerous orders
have been passed by this Court and implemented by the Government. To de ny
the respondent the same relief granted to his juniors and other simil arly situated
persons would amount to discrimination and violation of Article 14 of the
Constitution of India.
8.When that being so, the present petitioner alone cannot be singled out.
Therefore, the benefit accrued on him since has been denied, the Wr it Court has
__________
Page4 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA No. 585 of 2026
rightly interfered with the same, we do not propose to interfer e with the said
approach and the conclusion reached by the Writ Court. Therefore, for all these
reasons, the present appeal deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
9.Therefore, it is hereby directed that the Principal Chief Conserva tor of
Forests shall comply with the Government Order and pass necessary order s to
that effect regularising the services of the writ petitioner wit h effect from the
date of his initial appointment with all service benefits as dire cted in the very
Government Order itself within a period of two months from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order.
10.With the above directions, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(R.S.K.,J.) (N.S.,J.)
07-04-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
sai
__________
Page5 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WA No. 585 of 2026
R.SURESH KUMAR J.
and
N.SENTHILKUMAR J.
sai
To
M. Narayanasamy
W/o.Manirathinam,
Forest Guard, (Retired),
No.7/46, Pillaiyar Koil Street,
Devika Puram Post,
Chetpet Taluk,
Tiruvannamalai District
WA No. 585 of 2026
and
CMP No. 5574 of 2026
07-04-2026
__________
Page6 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis