Inordinate delay in seeking promotion and approaching the authorities only after superannuation may preclude entitlement to relief sought in a Writ Petition.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in her proceedings Memo No.2034/A2/2019, dated 18.11.2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to give the retrospective effect from 21.01.1995 to the petitioner''s promotion as storekeeper with all other monitory benefits.)

1. This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in the proceedings is Memo No.2034/A2/2019, dated 18.11.2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to give retrospective effect from 21.01.1995 to the petitioner''s promotion as ''Store Keeper'' with all other monetary benefits.

2. The petitioner''s name was appointed as sponsored through the District Employment Exchange, Coimbatore, for the post of Telephone Operator at Hotel Tamilnadu, Coimbatore, by order dated 18.04.1983 and she joined the duty on 22.04.1983. Subsequently, the petitioner was regularised w.e.f. 01.03.1984. The next cadre of this post was Assistant, but the respondent gave the promotion as ''Store Keeper'' on 06.07.1997, which is lower cadre to the post of Telephone Operator and due to personal reasons, the petitioner could not accept the promotion and the same was acknowledged by the respondents. The refusal of promotion is valid only for three years and the respondent/Corporation had granted promotion more than 30 persons as Store Keeper between the years 1993 to 2017. The petitioner superannuated on 31.05.2019 and written representation dated 20.06.2019 was made to the first and second respondents to re-consider the promotion as Store Keeper with retrospective effect 21.05.1995 and the same was rejected by the third respondent, by proceedings in Memo No.2034/A2/2019, dated 18.11.2019. Aggrieved by the above rejection order, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition before this Court for the relief stated supra.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Telephone Operator in the year 1983 and joined service on 22.04.1983, and regularised on 01.03.1984. As per the regularisation, she was promoted as Assistant, but, she was offered to the post of ''Store Keeper'' in the year 1987 and due to personal reasons, she could not take up the promotion and her refusal for promotion is valid only for three years, even according to the relinquish letter given by the petitioner. The petitioner was promoted as ''Store Keeper'' on 20.08.1987 and thereafter, she superannuated on 31.05.2019. The petitioner approached this Court by way of W.P.No.20127 of 2013, to direct the respondents therein to promote her as Accounts Assistant in the respondents/Corporation, with effect from 05.04.2008 with all attendant and monetary benefits and the said writ petition was dismissed on 27.11.2016. The petitioner filed a Writ Appeal against the said order dated 27.11.2016, by way of appeal in W.A.No.67 of 2017. Pending the writ appeal, this Court directed the respondents therein to consider the petitioner''s promotion on sympathetic ground. As per the direction of this Court, the TTDC acted upon and the petitioner was granted promotion as ''Store Keeper'' on 27.03.2019 without prejudice to her right of appeal. Thereafter, the Writ Appeal was dismissed by this Court on 04.04.2019, with an observation that “it is always open to the appellant to approach the appropriate forum, in case, she is still aggrieved”. The petitioner superannuated on 31.05.2019 and she made a representation on 20.06.2019 to reconsider her promotion as ''Store Keeper'' with retrospective effect from 21.01.1995 and for granting all other monetary benefits and the same was rejected by the third respondent, vide proceedings Memo No.2034/A2/2019, dated 18.11.2019, on the reason that, the petiti