SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 3448

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS 
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, K.RAJASEKAR, JJ.
B.Gopalakrishnan - Appellant 
Versus 
Government Of Tamil Nadu - Respondent 
W.P.Nos.22611, 16132, 21388, 21394, 21397, 22624, 21400, 22683, 22727, 25860 of 2024
Decided on : 20-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.V.Prakash Senior Counsel for Mr.Gautam S.Raman
For the Respondents:: Mrs.M.Geetha Thamaraiselvan, Mr.P.Kannankumar, Mr.B.Gandhi

Promotion is not an absolute right; it depends on service rules and seniority-cum-merit assessment, as upheld under the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act and Articles 14 and 16, ensuring service conditions are protected.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 - Section 75 - Constitutional challenge to amendment of Rule 7(3) regarding seniority for promotions in common cadre service - Claim of entitlement to promotion based on length of service not asserted - Promotion rights not guaranteed; considered only per applicable rules. (Paras 2, 8, 12, 17, 20, 23)

(B) Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India - Denial of promotional opportunities due to state-wide seniority list not regarded as ultra vires - Promotions must align with established service conditions and employees' rights. (Paras 6, 19, 21)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners employed in District Central Cooperative Banks challenged amendment to include Assistant General Manager post in common cadre service, alleging it prejudiced their promotional prospects based on seniority.

Findings of Court:
Inclusion of Assistant General Manager post in common cadre does not infringe Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution; service conditions of employees remain protected.

Issues: Whether the amendment is ultra vires and discriminates against senior employees in promotions.

Ratio Decidendi: The right to promotion is not absolute; promotions depend on service rules, and seniority-cum-merit assessment is lawful under the Act.

Result: All writ petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. challenge to the amendment affecting promotions in banks. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. contention regarding fairness in promotion processes. (Para 5 , 6)
3. government's rationale for amendment and promotion processes. (Para 7)
4. legal framework for constituting common cadre service. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. examination of legality of the government order. (Para 13 , 14)
6. grievance over promoting opportunities under common cadre service. (Para 15 , 16)
7. promotion rights under service rules clarified. (Para 17 , 18)
8. promotion is not an absolute right; mere inclusion in seniority isn't a claim. (Para 19 , 20 , 21)
9. service contracts protect employee benefits despite policy changes. (Para 22 , 23)

ORDER :

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

(i) W.M.P.No.17672 of 2024 seeking to permit the petitioners to file a single writ petition stands ordered on payment of separate Court fee.

(ii) For the reasons stated in the affidavits, W.M.P.Nos.17677 & 28227 of 2024 are ordered.

2. This batch of writ petitions on hand has been instituted either to issue a writ of declaration declaring the amendment to Rule 7(3) of the 1st respondent in G.O.(Ms)No.11, Co-operation, Food and Consumer Protection Department dated 24.01.2024 and the consequential provisional seniority list dated 29.05.2024 bearing ref.No.Rc.No.12367/ 2024-25/CCS to be ultra vires as offending Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India or to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the G.O.Ms.No.11, Co-operation, Food and Consumer Protection dated 24.01.2024 of the first respondent as notified in the Tamil Nadu Government Gazette dated 13.03.2024 and the consequential State Level Approved Seniority List of Managers of District Central Cooperative Bank as on 01.05.2024 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to continue the district wise promotions, respectively.

3. The facts in brief as stated by the writ petitioners reveal that the petitioners have been employed in various District Central Cooperative Banks across the State of Tamil Nadu in the subordinate posts. The petitioners were promoted as Managers and the next avenue of promotion is to the post of Assistant General Manager. The Government issued the impugned Government Order incorporating the post of Assistant General Manager under Common Cadre Service, in exercise of the powers conferred on the Government under Section 75 of the Tamil Nadu Cooperative Societies Act, 1983 (for short, “the Act”).

4. The inclusion of the post of Assistant General Manager into Common Cadre Service caused prejudice to the promotional opportunities of the writ petitioners for securing promotion to the post of Assistant General Manager, since the State-wise seniority list of Managers is notified for grant of promotion to the post of Assistant General Manager. Thus the writ petitions came to be instituted challenging the amendment and/or inclusion of the post of Assistant General Manager in Common Cadre Service.

5. The learned Senior Counsel Mr.V.Prakash appearing on behalf of the petitioners in W.P.No.16132 of 2024 would mainly contend that an employee, who entered into the services of one central cooperative bank, is deprived of his length of service in his parent bank, in view of the amendment and the publication of the State-wise seniority list. For example, a junior employee, who was promoted to the post of Manager in one central cooperative bank, may overlook another senior employee, who was promoted to the post of Manager in another central cooperative bank. Therefore, the senior employees who were promoted as Managers, on account of non-availability of vacancy in the post of Assistant General Manager in their parent banks, are deprived of their further promotions to the posts of Assistant General Manager and General Manager, on account of inclusion of the post of Assistant General Manager in Common Cadre Service. The learned Senior Counsel further contended that merit assessment has

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top