Denial of promotion during the currency of punishment is justified and does not amount to double jeopardy or arbitrary exercise of power.

The applicant was initially appointed as Junior Assistant on 01.09.1973 and subsequently he was promoted as Assistant in October 1982. Thereafter, he was promoted as Deputy Tahsildar and posted in the office of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Mayiladuthurai. His services in the post of Deputy Tahsildar was also regularised with effect from 30.10.1992. Subsequently, the respondent, by his proceedings dated 110. 1999 drawn a panel for promotion to the post of Tahsildars for the year 1998 in which the names of 31 persons have been included, but the name of the applicant was not included. According to the applicant, the persons, who were shown in serial Nos. 17 to 31 of the said panel dated 110. 1999 are juniors to him. In the said proceedings, it was stated that the applicants name was not included and he was found to be unfit for inclusion in the panel as charges are pending against the applicant. Therefore, challenging the same, the applicant has filed the above Original Application before the Tribunal. On abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court and re-numbered as WP No. 38420 of 2006.

2. It is seen from the records that a charge memo was issued by the respondent on 012. 1997 to the petitioner containing four charges under Rule 17 (a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. The charges relates to the unauthorised absence of the petitioner. After conducting an enquiry, the respondent, by proceedings dated 28.03.1998 imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. The appeal was also rejected by proceedings dated 24.07.1998. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed a revision petition to the Government on 17.08.1998. During the pendency of the Original Application, it is stated that the Revision Petition was allowed by the Government modifying the punishment into one of stoppage of increment for a period of six months without cumulative effect.

3. The petitioner would contend that the refusal of the respondent to include his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Tahsildar on the basis of minor punishment of stoppage of increment is illegal. According to the petitioner, such minor punishment is not a bar for inclusion of his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Tahsildar and therefore he is entitled for inclusion of his name in the panel for the year 1998.

4. The respondent has filed reply affidavit contending that at the time when the name of the applicant was taken up for consideration for inclusion in the panel for the year 1998, the applicant was imposed with punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect by proceedings of the respondent dated 28.03.1998 and the appeal filed by the petitioner was also rejected by the appellate authority. The Government, in Lr. No. 248, Personnel & Administrative Reforms Department dated 20.10.1997 had instructed that any punishment other than Censure imposed on an officer within a period of five years prior to the crucial date and a punishment of censure within a period of one year prior to the crucial date should be held against the officer and their names should be passed over from consideration. Therefore, due to pendency of the currency of punishment, the petitioners name was passed over and his name was not included in the list of panel for promotion to the post of Tahsildar in the year 1998. Since on the crucial date of drawal panel, the petitioner was imposed with punishment, his name was rightly excluded from consideration.

5. Heard both sides. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the punishment imposed on the petitioner pursuant to proceedings initiated under Rule 17 (a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules is a minor punishment of stoppage of increment f