The court established that seniority in public service appointments must follow prescribed vacancy-wise quotas instead of arbitrary cadre-based practices, ensuring compliance with statutory rules and principles of equality. This protects the rights of direct recruits over transferees.

ORDER :

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

Since the issues involved in all these writ petitions are interconnected and arise out of the same subject matter, they are taken up together and disposed of by way of this common order.

W.P. No. 29670 of 2015

2. This writ petition has been filed by the transferees challenging the memorandum dated 19.11.2015 issued by the Commissioner of Labour, whereby the representations submitted by the transferees seeking determination, fixation, and communication of their inter se seniority in the cadre of Labour Officers were rejected. The petitioners contend that such fixation of seniority ought to have been carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules.

W.P. Nos. 15623 of 2019, 15973 of 2018, 16929 of 2019, 14887 of 2019 and 1857 of 2020, 22881/2023, 26309/2018 and 26316 /2018

3. In these writ petitions, the petitioners are direct recruits appointed to the post of Labour Officer. They challenge the validity and correctness of G.O. (Ms) No. 38 dated 09.11.2019, whereby the transferees involved in these proceedings were placed above the direct recruits in the seniority list pertaining to the cadre of Labour Officers. The direct recruits were appointed in December 2012 against the vacancies pertaining to the year 2010–2011, whereas the transferees were appointed in April 2012 against the vacancies pertaining to the year 2011–2012.

4. Background of

4.1. was originally filed seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the official respondents to determine and fix the inter se seniority and to draw up a seniority list for the cadre of Labour Officers in accordance with Rule 35(a)(i) read with Rule 2(1) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules. This court vide interim order dated 04.07.2018 directed the official respondents to prepare a seniority list for the post of Labour Officers (now redesignated as Assistant Commissioners of Labour) from the year 1997–1998, after inviting objections and suggestions from the concerned individuals through the Commissioner of Labour,.

4.2. Aggrieved by the order dated 04.07.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge, the petitioners in preferred W.A. No. 1715 of 2018 before the Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench disposed of the said writ appeal with a direction to the learned Single Judge to work out the inter se seniority between the parties after hearing all the affected parties and considering the various grievances raised, including those of the direct recruits.

4.3. Pursuant to the above directions, the first respondent examined the matter in detail after considering the objections and suggestions submitted by the concerned parties. Consequently, the earlier guidelines issued in G.O. 4(D) No. 30 dated 23.08.1996 were set aside. Thereafter, a final inter se seniority list for the cadre of Assistant Commissioners of Labour (formerly Labour Officers) was prepared between the direct recruits and the transferees from the year 1998 onwards, in accordance with Sub-section (2) of Section 40 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants’ Conditions of Service Act, 2016 (corresponding to the erstwhile Rule 35(aa ) of the General Rules). In the said seniority list, the transferees were placed above the direct recruits. Aggrieved , the direct recruits are before this court.

5. Learned counsels appearing for the direct recruits, submitted that the Explanation to the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu Labour Service, which governs appointments to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Labour, specifically provides that the first vacancy shall be filled by direct recruitment and the next two vacancies shall be filled by recruitment by transfer from the category of Deputy Inspector of Labour