JUDGMENT

1. Leave granted. The questions which arise for consideration in these appeals are whether as a sequel to quashing of the order of punishment by the learned Single Judge, the Appellant became entitled to be promoted to the higher post from the date persons junior to him were promoted and whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in declaring that he shall not be entitled to claim notional promotion or promotional benefits.

2. The Appellant joined service as Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department of the Government of Tamil Nadu in 1982. A departmental inquiry was initiated against him vide Memo dated 6.7.1993 on the charge that he was responsible for shortage of material. At the conclusion of the inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority passed order dated 3.10.1994 and directed that ` 1,52,941/- be recovered from the Appellant. That order was set aside by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') vide order dated 27.30.1994 but gave liberty to the competent authority to pass appropriate order in accordance with law. After about six years, the Appellant was served with Memo dated 31.7.2000 for holding an inquiry on the same charg