Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.SUBRAMANIAN, G. ARUL MURUGAN, JJ
R.Venkatachalam – Appellant
Versus
Government of Tamilnadu – Respondent
C O M M O N J U D G M E N T
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
All these appeals are directed against a common order dated 06.02.2024 made in a batch of four Writ Petitions filed by the appellants in these appeals, challenging para 9(E) of G.O.Ms.No.158, Public Works (D2) Department, dated 01.11.2021, insofar as it makes the option exercised by the appellants herein opting for Water Resources Department as final and irreversible and for a consequential direction to seek fresh options from the appellants and allot them to the Public Works Department. A consequential prayer was also sought for to revise the promotions made pursuant to G.O.(2D) No.23, Public Works (A1) Department dated 30.08.2022.
2. All the appellants were recruited as Assistant Engineers in the Public Works Department in a selection process that was initiated between the years 1997 and 1999 and they formally joined the Public Works Department in the year 2000. In the year 2006, the Government took a decision to bifurcate the Public Works Department into two different departments, namely, the Public Works Department and the Water Resources Department and two Government Orders were passed in G.O.Ms
Options exercised by employees in a bifurcated department are final and irreversible, despite claims of temporary status due to pending seniority disputes.
The final and irreversible nature of options exercised by employees and its implications on seniority and promotions.
Revisions to seniority lists in public service must comply with established legal principles regarding merit and prior judicial directives, preserving previously established ranks unless lawfully cha....
Rule 10(a)(i) of the General Rules have to be ranked below TNPSC candidates irrespective of the date of appointment of such TNPSC candidates and special absorption rules candidates.
Timely challenges to seniority fixation are crucial; inaction and delay can bar claims for revision of seniority.
Court emphasized that administrative decisions regarding promotion and seniority must adhere to established rules and principles, ensuring equitable treatment for all eligible individuals.
The court held that settled seniority cannot be disturbed after a long period, emphasizing the principle of res judicata and the limits of administrative power in altering promotion dates.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
