Back
2013 Supreme(Mad) 2979
High Court of Judicature at Madras
D. HARIPARANTHAMAN, J.
Muthusaraswathi, Kancheepuram
Versus
Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes & Registration (H) Department, Chennai & Another
W.P.No.28351 of 2012 & M.P.No.1 of 2012
Decided On : 23-08-2013
Important Points
Subject
Employment - Promotion and Seniority
Act Referred
Headnote
Seniority - Promotion - Disciplinary Proceedings - G.O.Ms.No.103, Commercial Taxes and Registration (H) Department, dated 09.08.2011, G.O.Ms.NO.236, Commercial Taxes and Registration (H) Department, dated 30.08.2011 - The court discussed the legal provisions related to disciplinary proceedings and promotion, emphasizing that a charge memo must be prepared for disqualification from consideration for promotion. The court's decision was influenced by the interpretation of these provisions, ruling in favor of the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought inclusion in the panel for promotion to the post of District Registrar and subsequent promotion, but was excluded due to pending disciplinary proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner's exclusion from the promotion panel due to pending disciplinary proceedings was unjustified, as no charge memo had been prepared at the time of panel preparation.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's exclusion from the promotion panel and subsequent promotion due to pending disciplinary proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that a charge memo must be prepared for disqualification from consideration for promotion, and as no charge memo was issued at the time of panel preparation, the petitioner's exclusion was unjustified.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order, and directed the respondents to include the petitioner in the promotion panel and promote her on a notional basis from the date of her immediate junior's promotion.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:K. Bhaskar, Advocate.
For the Respondents: V. Jayaprakash Narayanan, Spl. GP.
1. The petitioner was appointed as Temporary Section Writer on 10.12.1979 and was confirmed in the said post. He was promoted as Junior Assistant on 13.01.1983 and thereafter, as Assistant on 13.08.1986. He was also promoted as Sub Registrar, Grade II on 10.08.2006 after having passed Accounts test for Executive Officer (E.O.). He was further promoted as Sub Registrar Grade I on 02.06.2008.
2. According to the petitioner, the second respondent issued seniority list of Sub Registrars Grade I as on 01.09.2010 in Proceedings No.50580/A2/2010 dated 24.09.2010, wherein, she is at Sl.No.94 and Ms.Sreekaladevi, Mr.K.Raja and Ms.R.Maria Joseph are shown as her juniors. Based on the aforesaid seniority list, when the panel for promotion to the post of District Registrar from Sub Registrars Grade I was issued in G.O.Ms.No.103, Commercial Taxes and Registration (H) Department, dated 09.08.2011, the name of the petitioner was left out.
3. Thereafter, promotions were effected in G.O.Ms.NO.236, Commercial Taxes and Registration (H) Department, dated 30.08.2011 and the juniors of the petitioners were promoted to the post of District Registrar. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner filed writ petition in W.P.No.26321 of 2011 praying to include her in the panel for promotion to the post of District Registrar for the year 2010-2011 and consequentially to promote her as District Registrar.
4. The said writ petition was disposed of on 27.02.2012 in the following terms :
"5. Learned counsel for the State placed on record a letter from the Inspector General, wherein it is stated that the error of department stands rectified, and her case has been recommended to the State Government for considering her name for promotion from the date of her immediate juniors was promoted, with all consequential benefits.
6, In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the State, this writ petition is disposed of, by directing the respondent No.1 to take final decision on recommendation regarding promotion of the petitioner within a period of one month of the receipt of certified copy of this order."
5. The aforesaid order dated 27.02.2012 in W.P.No.26231 of 2011 was passed based on the letter in No.54954/A1/2001, dated 27.02.2012 written by the second respondent to the Additional Government Pleader.
6. Paragraph 4 of the said letter is extracted hereunder:
"4. As she is fully qualified for inclusion in the District Registrar panel, now a proposal is being sent to Government for consider of her name for the said panel."
7. Therefore, the petitioner should have been included at the appropriate place in the panel and should have been promoted from the date on which her immediate junior was promoted as District Registrar. But the impugned order dated 12.06.2012 in Government Letter No.3617/H/2012-4 was issued by the first respondent stating that the petitioner is facing a disciplinary proceedings before the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Chennai, pursuant to Government letter (2D)No.40, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, dated 21.03.2012. Hence, the petitioner could not be included in the panel for District Registrar for the year 2010-2011 at the appropriate place in G.O.Ms.No.103, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, dated 09.08.2011.
8. Para 2 and 3 of the government letter dated 12.06.212 are extracted hereunder:
"2. You have been placed on your defence before the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Chennai, in Government letter (2D)No.40, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, dated 21.3.2012. The Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings inquiry is equivalent to Disciplinary Proceedings initiated under rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules and it should be held against the officer for inclusion in the panel as per Letter (Ms)No.248, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, dated 20.10.1997. Hence, your name cannot be included in the panel of District Registrar
