IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN, J.
P. Sivaprakasam - Appellant
Versus
Tamil Nadu Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. - Respondent
W.P. No. 33488 of 2014, M.P. Nos. 1 to 3 of 2014
Decided On : 18-03-2025
ORDER :
1. This writ petition has been filed calling for the records relating to the panedl made in Proc.No.AE4/51397/2013 dated 22.01.2014 by the 1st respondent and the consequential orders made in Na.Ka.No.E1/2978/2013 dated 12.11.2014, Na.Ka.No.E1/2978/2013 (i) dated 13.11.2014, Na.Ka.No.E1/2978/2013/(ii) dated 13.11.2014 and Na.Ka.No.E1/2978/2013 (iii) dated 13.11.2014 passed by the 2nd respondent so far it is against the petitioner and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioner at appropriate place in the panel of Superintendent for the year 2013 published in Proc.No.AE4/51397/2013 dated 22.01.2014 published by the 1st respondent and promote the petitioner to the post of Superintendent with all attendant benefits.
2. The factual matrix of the case is as under:-
(a) The petitioner was originally appointed as Bill Clerk on 19.04.1984 in Civil Supplies Corporation, Erode and subsequently promoted as Junior Assistant on 21.02.1997. His name was included in the panel of Junior Assistant and Typist vide office proceedings dated 22.12.2009 and he was promoted as Assistant on 26.03.2010.
(b) According to the petitioner, on 12.02.2010, charge memo was issued alleging that he has not discharged his supervisory jurisdiction properly against the employees of the Corporation. After enquiry, stoppage of increment for four months without cumulative effect was awarded on 20.12.2010.
(c) Thereafter, three months increment was stopped from 01.01.2011 to 31.03.2011.
(d) According to the petitioner, minor punishment was issued under service regulations. On 22.01.2014, the 1st respondent herein in his office proceedings No.AE4/51397/2013 drawn a panel of Superintendent for the year 2013 wherein the petitioner name was not included but in the annexure under the heading II, list of name not eligible due to currency of punishment, it was shown that the petitioner's name has not been included in the list due to currency of the punishment. The 2nd respondent herein in his office proceedings Na.Ka.No.2978/2013/E1 dated 03.09.2014 forwarded the name of the petitioner and another employee to the 1st respondent for including their name in the panel for the post of Superintendent for the year 2014.
(e) The 2nd respondent herein in his office proceedings Na.Ka.No.E1/2978/2013 dated 12.11.2014 passed an order holding that the promotion for the post of Assistant was wrongly given to the petitioner on 26.03.2010 without verifying the departmental enquiry pending against him during the relevant period in respect of major punishment and therefore, he was reverted back to the post of Junior Assistant and also directed the Superintendent (Administration) Tiruppur to enter the same in the petitioner's record.
(f) The 2nd respondent herein in his office proceeding Na.Ka.No.E1/2989/2013 dated 13.11.2014 passed an order stating that since a punishment of stoppage of increment for 3 months without cumulative effect was awarded against the petitioner on 20.12.2010, his name cannot be included in the list of panel of Assistant for the year 2011 and therefore, after expiry of the currency of the punishment period, his name was included in the panel of the year 2012 in terms of the order dated 07.01.2013 made in Na.Ka.No.E2/3243/2012 passed by the 2nd respondent. In view of the above fact, the petitioner's name was included in the list of Junior Assistant above one Mr.K.Govindaraj.
(g) On 13.11.2014 itself, the 2nd respondent herein in his office proceeding Na.Ka.No.E1/2978/2013/(ii) passed an order promoting the petitioner to the post of Assistant with effect from 05.03.2013. The 2nd respondent herein, in his office proceeding Na.Ka.No.El/2978/2013/(iii) dated 13.11.2014 communicated an order by holding that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant only on 05.03.2013 after reversion and therefore he has completed the service of 1 year 5 months and 26 days only in the post of Assistant till 30.09.2014 and therefore h
Promotion eligibility is contingent upon the absence of pending charges or punishments, as per service regulations.
Promotion rights cannot be denied based on charges issued after the crucial date for eligibility, as established by the Departmental Promotion Committee's recommendation.
A government servant is entitled to promotion consideration after the period of minor punishment, as imposed check periods are illegal and impermissible under statutory rules.
An employee under punishment on the crucial date for promotion cannot be considered for promotion, as per established policy.
Promotion eligibility must be assessed based on the crucial date, not subsequent disciplinary actions, ensuring timely resolution of disciplinary proceedings.
Eligibility for promotion cannot be denied due to administrative delays; notional promotions can impact pensionary benefits.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.