N. Kirubakaran, J.

Can the punishment order in effect punish a person twice is the question before this Court. If the contention of the appellants in W.A. No. 546 of 2015 is to be upheld, then the first respondent would be punished twice by the single punishment order dated 15.11.2012.

2. The parties are referred as per their rank in W.A.No.620 of 2015.

3. The Appeals have been preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge quashing the resolution and the seniority list prepared by the Corporation and further, directing the Corporation to promote the first respondent in W.A.No.620 of 2015 as Additional City Health Officer Grade I-B with effect from 05.11.2013 instead of 23.10.2014 as already promoted by the Corporation.

4. The facts of the case are as follows:-

(a). The first respondent joined the appellant Corporation of Chennai on 29.06.1992 as Assistant Health Officer and his service was regularized with effect from 29.06.1992 by an order dated 29.03.2004. The said post of Health Officer has subsequently been re-designated as Zonal Health Officer which is a Class-II post.

(b). The first respondent was issued a show cause notice making certain allegations against him on 24.08.2012 by Joint Commissioner (Health) and the reply dated 06.09.2012 was submitted by the first respondent. However, by proceedings dated 15.11.2012, the Deputy Commissioner imposed a penalty of stoppage of increment for a period of three months without cumulative effect. A review petition was filed by the first respondent on 06.12.2012 before the concerned authority. However, the said authority has not passed any orders on the said petition.

(c). On 11.01.2013, the first respondent filed an appeal before the Government of Tamil Nadu against the punishment order dated 15.11.2012 stopping the increment and the order of punishment should start to run from the date of service of order on the first respondent on 16.11.2012 or from the date of increment due. Mean while, the appellant Corporation prepared a panel for promotion to the post of Additional City Health Officer taking 1st April 2013 as crucial date and the first respondent's name was not included in the panel as he sustained a punishment on 15.11.2012.

(d). The Appellant/Corporation implemented the punishment order imposed on the first respondent only from 1st July 2013 on which date the next increment was due. The first respondent's name was not included in the promotion list and respondents 2 to 4, who were juniors to the first respondent were promoted. Challenging the resolution dated 26.09.2013 passed by the Corporation by which the aforesaid promotion was made, a writ petition was filed and thereafter, the prayer in the writ petition was amended to quash the consequential order dated 05.11.2013 by which respondents 2 to 4 were promoted as Additional City Health Officer.

(e). The appellant/Corporation contended that the implementation of the punishment was based on two Government letters viz., Letter No.18667/S/2006-1, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 28.04.2006 and Lr.No.13400/S/2007-6, dated 11.09.2009 which state that the punishment of stoppage of increment would commence only from the actual date of increment. However, disagreeing with the said contention, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition relying upon the earlier order passed in W.P.No.29297 of 2006 dated 29.07.2006, wherein it has been held that the Government letters dated 28.04.2006 and 11.09.2009 have no statutory force and that cannot be acted upon.

(f). The learned Single Judge also relied upon the full bench judgment of this Court in the case of Deputy Inspector General of Police, Thanjavur Range and another v. Rani, 2011 3 CTC 129, wherein it was held that a detailed instruction given by the Government cannot be equated to the statutory rules framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India and the Government letters are not statutory in nature as they are not framed under