M. Sasikala vs Secretary to Government, Commissioner of Revenue Administration

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3897

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G.R. SWAMINATHAN, J.
M. Sasikala - Petitioner
Versus
The Secretary to Government, Commissioner of Revenue Administration and Ors. - Respondents
WP(MD) Nos. 21566, 21601, 21602 & 22503 of 2022 and WMP(MD) Nos.16694, 16695, 15710, 15711, 15746, 15747, 15748, 15749 & 20953 of 2022
Decided On : 06-12-2022

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners: Mr. T.S. Mohamed Mohideen.
For the Respondents: Mr. R. Baskaran, assisted by Mr. A.K. Manikkam, Mr. J. Anand Kumar.

Headnote:
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 - Civil Appeal - Power of High Court to issue certain writs - Calling for records pertaining - Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for records pertaining to order passed in passed by 2nd respondent and consequential order in by 2nd respondent and quash same - Held, Court satisfied that respondents have not adhered to due process of law before implementing orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court - There has been clear violation of principles of natural justice - Respondents have not borne in mind principle of proportionality - They were obliged to undertake exercise of finding out if petitioners can be accommodated in their existing posts without having to face prospect of reversion - Court bear in mind that Hon'ble Apex Court is effectively seized of issue - Impugned orders were passed by District Collector during pendency of SLP (C) - Hon'ble Division Bench had stayed order passed by a learned Judge of this Court for implementing - Writ petitions allowed.

ORDER :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order passed in Na.Ka.A1/31115/2019 passed by 2nd respondent dated 01.09.2022 and consequential order in Na.Ka.A1/31115/2019 dated 05.09.2022 by the 2nd respondent and quash the same.)

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the notification of the third respondent in Na.Ka.A1/31115/2019 dated 28.02.2022, 09.05.2022 and 01.09.2022 and consequential proceedings of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.A2/1892/2022 dated 05.09.2022 and directing the respondent to re-post the petitioners to their original posts as Deputy Tahsildars and thus render justice.)

1. The petitioners herein are working in Virudhunagar District as Deputy Tahsildars. While the petitioners in W.P.(MD)No.22503 of 2022 were promoted as Assistants, the other three petitioners were directly recruited as Assistants. All of them subsequently became Deputy Tahsildars. By the impugned proceedings dated 01.09.2022 and 05.09.2022 issued by the District Collector, Virudhunagar and the consequential proceedings dated 05.09.2022, the petitioners have been reverted.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioners reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavits filed in support of the writ petitions and called upon this Court to quash the impugned proceedings and allow the writ petitions as prayed for.

3. The District Collector, Virudhunagar has filed a detailed counter affidavit and also typed set of papers. The learned Additional Advocate General took me through its contents. The core submission of the respondents is that the impugned proceedings are direct outcome of the various decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. It is not as if the respondents have chosen to issue the impugned proceedings on their own. When the respondents have acted only pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Apex Court, the impugned proceedings cannot be questioned. The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the writ petitions deserve summary dismissal.

4. I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record. The impugned proceedings refer to two decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The first is dated 11.09.2018 and the second is dated 12.03.2019. The first decision namely Civil Appeal No.9334 of 2018 (Government of Tamil Nadu and Another Vs. Registration Department, SC/ST and M.B.C Employees General Welfare Sangam and Another) arose out of the decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench of Madras High Court rendered in W.P.Nos.11296 of 2003 etc batch dated 28.02.2005. The said decision in turn arose out of the decision of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chenni in O.A.No.9044 of 1997 etc batch rendered on 22.10.2002. The issue inter alia pertained to reservation in the matter of appointment to the post of Deputy Tahsildar in Tamilnadu Revenue Subordinate Services. Since 1977, the Government of Tamilnadu was applying the principle of reservation not only for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes but also for Backward Classes. In Indra Sawhney and Others Vs. Union of India and Others (AIR 199