The determination of seniority for government employees must adhere to statutory provisions, prioritizing the date of joining over examination performance.

ORDER

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

Both the Writ Petitions have been filed in the nature of Certiorarified Mandamus seeking records of the second respondent in the two Writ Petitions, the Director of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services, Nandanam, Chennai, in proceedings in Na.Ka.No. 23703/R2/2023 dated06.03.2024 and to quash the same.

2. The writ petitioner seek a further direction that the second respondent must refix the seniority of the petitioners after giving proper notice and calling for objections from those who had been affected from among Typists and Junior Assistants, who had been appointed pursuant to the Notification No. 14/2012 dated 27.04.2012 issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission.

3. W.P.No. 7021 of 2024 had been filed by one petitioner and W.P.No. 7074 of 2024 had been filed by 26 petitioners. The relief sought by them being common and the issues raised by them stating as to why the relief should be considered by this Court also being the same and arguments also advanced on the same lines, a common order is passed.

4. For the sake of convenience and as illustration, the affidavit filed in support of W.P.No. 7021 of 2024 is taken up for consideration.

5. The petitioner as the other petitioners in W.P.No. 2071 of 2024 was selected as Junior Assistant consequent to them having participated in a recruitment notification issued by the Tamilnadu Public Service Commission/Notification No. 14/12 dated 27.04.2012. That notification was issued calling for applicants for the post of Junior Assistant (non security), Junior Assistant (Security), Bill Collector (Grade-I), Typist for which a common examination was conducted by the Public Service Commission. The writ petitioners had been selected as Junior Assistants. They are deeply aggrieved by the seniority list published by the second respondent whereby they have been placed below those who had been selected along with them as typists.

6. It is the claim of the writ petitioners that they should have been placed enmasse senior to the typists as was always done in the previous years and in the subsequent years. They claim that having been selected in the year 2013, they alone stood prejudiced by the inter-se/seniority list which had been published by the second respondent.

7. It is to be noted that in the notification, the Tamilnadu Public Service Commission had held out that there were 4402 vacancies and 463 carry forward vacancies to the post of Junior Assistants (non security) and 292 vacancies for the post of Junior Assistants (security) and 31 vacancies for the post of Bill Collectors Grade-I. With respect to Typists. it had been stated that there were 3321 vacancies and apart from 353 vacancies which were block log vacancies which were taken forward. The educational qualifications required had also been given. The common qualification was pass in the SSLC public examination or its equivalent with eligibility to be admitted to the Higher Secondary Course or to College Course. Additionally, there was also a requirement of a technical qualification for those who opt exclusively for the post of typist. They must have a pass in higher/senior Tamil and English in typewriting or higher/senior grade in Tamil and lower junior grade in English or higher/senior grade in English and lower/junior grade in Tamil. In effect those who opted to be appointed as typists must know typewr