R. Subbiah, J.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the concerned records from the respondents, quash G.O.(Nilai) No.33, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (Ma.Na.3) Department, dated 12.02.2016, issued by the first respondent, in so far approving to fill-up the post of Senior Law Officer in the second respondent/Corporation, only by deputation and Resolution No.236 of 2015, dated 27.05.2015, bearing Po.Thu.Na.Ka.No.E2/21762/2013 of the second respondent resolving to fill up the post of Senior Law Officer only by deputation, as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to law and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to frame the rules creating avenue of promotion from the post of Law Officer to the Post of Senior Law Officer and consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Senior Law Officer.

2. The facts, as projected by the petitioner and which led to the filing of the above case, read thus :-

The petitioner is a B.Sc., Graduate in Zoology and completed his B.L. Degree in the year 1986. He was enrolled in the Tamil Nadu Bar Council on 15.10.1986 and practised as an Advocate, both in the High Courts and Subordinate Courts for thirteen years. Thereafter, he was recruited to the post of Assistant Law Officer, in the second respondent/Corporation, on 22.03.1999 and subsequently promoted as Law Officer on 26.07.2006.

3. While the petitioner is working as Law Officer, the second respondent created the post of Senior Law Officer and resolved to fill up the post, by Direct Recruitment/Promotion/Deputation and qualification for the same had been prescribed. While so, the second respondent, by the impugned resolution, dated 27.05.2015, resolved to fill up the post of Senior Law Officer, only by deputation. This was objected to by the petitioner, through his representation, dated 27.05.2015, pointing out that he is fully qualified to hold the post of Senior Law Officer and that his right of promotion will be completely taken away, if the post is filled up only on the basis of deputation. However, the first respondent, by the impugned Government Order (Nilai) No.33, dated 12.02.2016, has approved the Resolution of the second respondent, dated 27.05.2015 and thereby, the post of Senior Law Officer, in the second respondent/Corporation, can be filled up only by deputation, thereby barring the internal candidates.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, while reiterating the aforesaid facts, submitted that earlier the second respondent passed a resolution dated 26.07.2013, wherein the qualification of ten years as Law Officer was deliberately fixed, with a view to make the petitioner ineligible for the post of Law Officer, since at that time the petitioner has completed only 9 years and 6 months of service as Law Officer and hence, the petitioner made a representation on 18.11.2013 and while the same was pending consideration, the second respondent has passed the Resolution, dated 27.05.2015, without cancelling the earlier Resolution, 26.07.2013; in the resolution dated 27.05.2015, two posts were created, viz., one for the post of Health Education Officer and another for the post of Senior Law Officer; further, for the post of Health Educational Officer, it is mentioned that the post has to be filled up either by promotion or by deputation; however, for the post of Senior Law Officer, it is mentioned that the post has to be filled up only by deputation. Whereas in the earlier resolution dated 26.07.2013, a minimum period of 10 years experience in the post of Law Officer at Corporation of Chennai had been fixed as a qualifying service to the post of Senior Law Officer by promotion, but at that time the petitioner had completed only 9 years and 6 months of service as Law Officer. The petitioner made a representation to the respondents on 01.07.2015, pointing out