SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3117

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
M. Mani - Appellant
Versus
The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Chennai & Another - Respondent
W.P. No. 15958 of 2014
Decided On : 26-07-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:K.M. Ramesh, Advocate. For the Respondents:R1, S. Anitha, Special Government Pleader, R2, S. Mani, Advocate.

The central legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's lack of qualification to read and write in Tamil as per the Service Rules rendered the petitioner ineligible for the appointment as Forest Watcher.

Headnote:

Forest Watcher - Appointment Dispute - The court dismissed the writ petition seeking the appointment of the petitioner as Forest Watcher and payment of arrears, citing the petitioner's lack of qualification to read and write in Tamil as per the Service Rules.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to be appointed as Forest Watcher and receive arrears of salary, seniority, and other benefits. The petitioner claimed to have been working as a Plot Watcher and included in the seniority list but was not appointed as Forest Watcher.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner was found ineligible for the appointment to the post of Forest Watcher due to not meeting the qualification requirements as per the Service Rules.

Issues: Dispute over the appointment of the petitioner as Forest Watcher and the payment of arrears and benefits.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the petitioner's lack of qualification to read and write in Tamil as per the Service Rules, which rendered the petitioner ineligible for the appointment as Forest Watcher.

Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and no costs were awarded.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to appoint the petitioner as Forest Watcher from the date on which the second respondent was appointed as Forest Watcher and pay all arrears of salary, seniority and other consequential benefits.)

1. The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the first respondent to appoint the petitioner as Forest Watcher from the date on which the second respondent was appointed as Forest Watcher and pay all arrears of salary, seniority and other consequential benefits.

2. The petitioner states that he was working as Plot Watcher in the first respondent's Thiruvannamalai Division during the relevant point of time. He was initially appointed as temporary Plot Watcher in the year 1982. The petitioner states that the time scale of pay was granted to him by the competent authority.

3. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.64 dated 08.03.1999, directing the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests to prepare State wide seniority list of Plot watchers working in the various Departments for the purpose of granting the benefit of permanent absorption subject to assessment of their eligibility and other criterias.

4. Accordingly, the State wide seniority list was prepared and the name of the petitioner was included in the seniority list. However, he was not appointed as Forest watcher. Thus, the petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.

5. With reference to the claim of the writ petitioner, the 1st respondent filed a counter affidavit, stating that the petitioner has not qualified to read and write in Tamil as per the letter of the District Forest Officer, Sathyamangalam Division dated 28.05.2009. In this regard, Paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit is extracted hereunder:

“6. It is submitted that the writ petitioner was absorbed as supernumerary post of Plot watcher from 07.08.2009 as per G.O.Ms.No.95 Environment and Forest (FR-2) Department dated 07.08.2009 in the scale of pay Rs.2500-5000+GP 500. Earlier wards the writ petitioner was allotted as Reserve watcher in Sathyamangalam Division as per Principle Chief Conservator of Forests No.SF2/19195/05 dated 28.07.2005. But the writ petitioner did not to read and write in Tamil. The writ petitioner is allowed for 15 days to each read and write but he has not qualified to read and write in Tamil as per District Forest Officer, Sathyamangalam Division, Letter No.E2/1710/08 dated 28.05.2009. The petitioner was consider, but due to lack of qualification prescribed by the Tamil Nadu Forest Subordinate Service Rule, the writ petitioner has not availed opportunity. Hence he is not eligible for Reserve Watcher Post.”

6. In view of the fact that the petitioner was found that he is not eligible for appointment to the Post of Forest Watcher in accordance with the Service Rules in force, no further consideration is required.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top