The court affirmed the right to retrospective promotion for Health Inspectors based on qualifications, mandating compliance with prior judicial orders.

ORDER :

R.N. Manjula, J.

These writ petitions have been filed to issue writs of mandamus directing the respondents to retrospectively promote the petitioners in the cadre of Health Inspector with effect from the date on which they had acquired Certificate for completing Sanitary Inspector Course and regularize their services in the above post by extending the monetary benefits and other benefits as per the Government Order issued in G.O.(D) No.359, Health and Family Welfare Department dated 26.04.2004.

2. Heard Mr.B.Prem Narayanan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.T.Chezhiyan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.

3. The Petitioners have been appointed as Health Inspector/Vaccinator/Special Cholera Worker and they are entitled to the benefit of the Government Order issued in G.O.(D) No.359, Health and Family Welfare (N2) Department dated 26.04.2004 for retrospective promotion on par with one Ramalingam in the post of Health Inspector with effect from the date on which they had acquired Certificate for completing Sanitary Inspector Course. It is further submitted that similarly placed persons have field a batch of writ petitions before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court and got them allowed. Challenging the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court a Civil Appeal was filed before the Supreme Court and that was also dismissed subsequently. The persons with whom these petitioners claim parity for the purpose of giving retrospecting impact for promotion in the post of Health Inspector for getting a chequered history.

4. One Dhanasekaran has filed an original application in O.A. No. 3763 of 1994 before the State Administrative Tribunal by claiming the relief of regularization of an officer in the post of Health Inspector with effect from 03.10.1970 on which date he claims to be eligible to be promoted to the post of Health Inspector. The said application was allowed on 16.03.1996. Thereafter, one Ramalingam filed an original application by claiming parity with the said Dhanasekaran in O.A. No. 7622 of 1997 and the same was allowed on 04.12.1997. The department filed an appeal before the High Court that was dismissed and thereafter, the matter was taken up-to the Supreme Court and that was also dismissed.

5. Subsequently, the Government has issued G.O.(D) No.359, Health and Family Welfare (N2) Department dated 26.04.2004 for regularizing the services of the Ramalingam in the cadre of Health Inspector by sanctioning a supernumerary post. Subsequently, a batch of similarly placed persons [M.Janarthanam and others] have filed a batch of writ petitions in W.P. Nos. 29794 of 2005 etc., batch and those matters were dealt before the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court and the final order came to be passed on 13.07.2007 by allowing those writ petitions and by issuing directions to the respondents to grant regularization of their services in the cadre of Health Inspector from the date they had acquired their qualification and to grant consequential monetary benefits. Another set of similarly placed persons have filed writ petitions claiming the same benefits and got their petitions allowed, however, subject to the outcome of the SLP filed challenging the order passed in W.P. No. 29794 of 2005 [Janarthanam Batch].

6. It is learnt that the SLP has been converted into Civil Appeal Nos. 6660 of 2011 etc., batch and that was also got dismissed on 25.02.2015. Review Petitions in Rev. Petition (Civil) Nos. 3521 to 3726 of 2018 filed were also dismissed on 12.12.2018. Thereafter, the second respondent issued proceedings dated 29.02.2019 directing the Deputy Director of Health Services to provide the service particulars of only those writ petitioners who filed writ petitions in order to issue / give order in compliance of the order passed in W.P. No. 29794 of 2005 and batch.

7. Now these petitioners claim that they are also simi