Refusal to grant notional promotion based on superannuation deemed arbitrary; seniority and qualification recognized as fundamental rights warranting equal treatment.

JUDGMENT :

C.SARAVANAN, J.

This Intra-Court Appeal is preferred against the Impugned Order dated14.10.2022 passed by the Writ Court in W.P.No.17131 of 2014.

2. The said Writ Petition was filed by the Respondent herein for the following relief:-

“Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the Order No.025811/275/G30/G301/2014-1 dated 17.04.2014 issued by the 2^nd respondent and quash the same as being illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently issue a direction to the 1^st and 2^nd respondents to grant notional promotion to the petitioner to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer on the basis of the panel dated 21.10.2008 on par with his juniors, with all attendant service benefits, within a time frame.”

3. By the Impugned Order dated 14.10.2022, the Writ Court in W.P.No.17131 of 2014 quashed the Order dated 17.04.2014 issued by the 2^nd Appellant and allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Respondent/Writ Petitioner with the following observations:-

“7. By the time the Board proceedings dated 03.04.2010 was passed, the petitioner herein had reached the age of superannuation and he was also permitted to retire on 30.06.2009. Thus, citing this administrative order and attempting to give a retrospective effect may not be permissible.

8. When the petitioner's junior, namely P.Chellan, who had also reached the age of superannuation, had approached this Court, seeking for notional promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, his claim was entertained by the Writ Court and confirmed in the intra court appeal also. Admittedly, the petitioner herein is senior to Thiru.P.Chellan in the promotional panel. While that being so, the petitioner would also be entitled for the similar relief and for grant of notional promotion. By applying the ratio laid down by this Court in W.A.No.510 of 2013, I am inclined to allow the claim made by the petitioner herein. Thus, the reasons adduced by the respondent in the impugned order cannot be sustained.

9. In the light of the above findings, the impugned order dated 17.04.2014 is quashed. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the respondents herein to pass orders, granting notional promotion to the petitioner herein for the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted and accordingly, disburse all the terminal and pensionary benefits, within a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands allowed. No costs.”

4. This is the 2^nd round of litigation before this Court. The Order dated 17.04.2014 impugned in W.P.No.17131 of 2014 was passed by the 2^nd Appellant pursuant to an earlier Order dated 13.02.2014 passed in W.P.No.23856 of 2009 preferred by the Respondent/Writ Petitioner, to direct the 1^st and 2^nd Appellant herein to grant notional promotion to the Respondent/Writ Petitioner to the post of 'Assistant Accounts Officer' with all attendant benefits by considering the Respondent/Writ Petitioner's representations dated 15.06.2009 and 31.07.2009. The Respondent/Writ Petitioner was serving as an 'Accounts Supervisor' and attained the age of superannuation on 30.06.2009

5. It appears that the Respondent/Writ Petitioner's name was also included in the panel for promotion to the post of 'Assistant Account