2009 Supreme(Mad) 1246
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. JAICHANDREN
S.R. Shanmuga Sekaran
Versus
The Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department & Others
W.P.No.29747 of 2004
Decided on: 20-04-2009
For the Petitioner:N.S. Nandakumar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: V. Viswanathan, Additional Government Pleader.
The pendency of disciplinary proceedings should not hinder the consideration of an incumbent for promotion if found otherwise fit.
Headnote:
Mandamus - Promotion Dispute - Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission - Highways Department - G.O.Ms.No.76 (Highways) Department, dated 14. 2003 - Notional Promotion - Recovery of Rs.200 - G.O.Ms.No.76 (Highways) Department, dated 14. 2003
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to direct the award of selection grade and special grade for 20 years of service and promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer. The petitioner had retired and was imposed with a minor punishment of recovery of Rs.200.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the first respondent to consider the petitioner's request for notional promotion and monetary benefits in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.76 (Highways) Department, dated 14. 2003, within twelve weeks.
Issues: Promotion dispute, notional promotion, recovery of Rs.200, eligibility for promotion
Ratio Decidendi: The pendency of disciplinary proceedings cannot be a ground for not considering an incumbent in the zone of consideration for promotion, especially when otherwise considered fit for promotion.
Final Decision: The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs.
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of mandamus to direct the second respondent to award selection grade and special grade for the 20 years of continuous service rendered by the petitioner and to promote him to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer, on par with his immediate junior, G. Dhakshinamoorthy, who is at Sl.No.63 in the adhoc list of Assistant Engineers/Junior Engineers, communicated by the proceedings, dated 24. 2003 and at Sl.No.47, in Annexure III of the G.O.Ms.No.76 (Highways) Department, dated 14. 2003, with monetary and service benefits, without considering the charge memo, in Rc.B3/3620/91 (TDP.No.29/91).
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had stated that the petitioner had joined the service as a Junior Engineer in the Highways Department, through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, on 21. 1977. After obtaining a Diploma in Civil Engineering he had also acquired a B.E. Degree in Civil Engineering. In accordance with the rules in force, the petitioner and 17 others were re-designated as Assistant Engineers, with effect from 211. 1983. The probation of the petitioner had been declared by the proceedings of the Superintending Engineer, Highways and Rural Works, Tirunelveli, dated 24. 1994. The petitioners service had been regularised, with effect from the date of his appointment. The petitioner had also passed the departmental accounts test for officers, on 15. 1982.
4. It has also been stated that the petitioner had been posted in the various panchayat unions, as a Junior Engineer, from 6. 1984 to 6. 1987. Thereafter, he had been transferred as an Assistant Engineer of the Tamilnadu Bhoodhan movement, Madurai, at Trichy and to other unions. At the time of the filing of the writ petition the petitioner was working as an Assistant Engineer, National Rural Employment Programme, Sub-Division, Office of the Executive Engineer, District Rural Development Agency Campus, Tirunelveli. The petitioner is entitled to be awarded selection grade on completion of 10 years, with effect from 211. 1993 and Special Grade, with effect from 211. 2003, for promotion in terms of the policy decision of the Government issued with regard to the granting of such promotions, if the petitioner had not reached the zone of consideration.
5. It has also been stated that the petitioner had reached the zone of consideration for the promotional post of Assistant Divisional Engineer during the year 2002-2003. In the adhoc list of Assistant Engineers/Junior Engineers, communicated by the proceedings of the Chief Engineer, Highways, dated 24. 2003, the petitioner was ranked at Serial No.62. The immediate junior at Sl.No.63 was G. Dhakshinamoorthy. From the said list 37 Assistant Engineers have been separated in the order of seniority and shown as persons fit for promotion as Assistant Divisional Engineer in the Annexure I of G.O.No.76 (Highways) Department, dated 14. 2003. In the same combined list, 13 juniors have been shown as persons fit for appointment as Divisional Engineers. The placement of 13 persons in the roster of reservation has been shown in Annexure II of the said Government Order. By fixing the ratio at 3:1, a combined panel of Assistant Engineers and Junior Engineers for 50 persons have been shown in Annexure III of the Government Order. In the process of selection, G. Dhakshinamoorthy, who is the immediate junior of the petitioner, is ranked at No.47. Whereas, the petitioner has been left out.
6. It has been further stated that after effecting the promotion by way of the said Government Order the petitioner had been informed by the impugned letter, dated 5. 2003, that his name had been considered for inclusion in the adhoc list of Assistant Engineers/Junior Engineers fit for promotion/appointment to the post of Assistant Divisional Engi