ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned orders giving promotion to Assistants as Superintendent by the 1st respondent University.

2.The case of the petitioners is as follows:

(i)The petitioners were appointed as Tabulators on a consolidated pay with effect from 07.09.1994 and other various dates. They were properly sponsored by the District Employment exchanges in surrounding districts namely, Tirunelveli, Thoothukudi and Nagercoil. In the year 1994 the 1st respondent University called for a list of candidates from the Employment Exchange for filling up the post of Tabulators on regular basis and further permitted the candidates, who were working as daily wages in the 1st respondent University to attend the interview on 25.08.1994 and the Selection Committee selected 40 candidates and the Syndicate accepted the selection list vide its resolution dated 31.08.1994. Thereupon the temporary Tabulators were appointed on regular basis with effect from 08.09.1994.

(ii) About one year thereafter, the 1st respondent University vide Syndicate Resolution dated 16.09.1995 placed the petitioners as Junior Assistants with effect from 08.09.1995. Out of 40 persons, only 35 persons remained in service and 5 were newly appointed as Junior Assistants and therefore, the strength of the Junior Assistants became 40. Their probation was declared vide order dated 28.09.1997 and the seniority list of Junior Assistants was announced vide Syndicate Resolution dated 14.11.1997 and the seniority was fixed based on the basis of their appointments. Their services in the Junior Assistant post have been regularised vide proceedings dated 24.03.1998. The said regularisation was made with effect from their date of initial appointment as Tabulators. However, no monetary benefits were granted to them.

(iii) While so, the petitioners made various representations regarding their appointment, regularisation, seniority, pension, pay revision and the 1st respondent University based on their representation made one man commission, namely, Lakhmi Kandhan Bharathi, I.A.S., (Rtd) vide Syndicate resolution dated 10.10.1998 and the said Commission had also submitted its report on 29.09.1999, recommending the regularisation of the Junior Assistants to be done with effect from the year 1994 along with monetary benefits. However, subsequently, the University appointed Three Men Commission and it also submitted its report on 06.11.2000 and the said Commission did not agree with the recommendations made by the One Man Commission to regularise all the candidates with effect from their dates of joining with monetary benefits and it has prepared a new seniority list.

(iv) At this juncture, the University Syndicate vide resolution dated 15.05.2000, decided to promote six senior most Junior Assistants as Assistants and the said promotion was sought to be made on the basis of the Seniority List adopted by the syndicate dated 14.11.1997. There were several correspondence with regard to the promotion, regularisation to the particular post and preparation of seniority list and the University without following the procedure accepted the report of the Three Men Commission and approved the refixation of seniority of the 40 Junior Assistants vide its resolution dated 17.02.2001, where the petitioners seniority was pushed back to the lower rank. Despite their representations, the respondents has vide impugned order promoted three of those Assistants as Superintendents vide proceedings dated 09.07.2007, 18.10.2007 and 10.03.2008. Challenging the same the present writ petition is filed.

3.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the promotion was given based on the resolution dated 17.02.2001 and it is contrary to the seniority list prepared vide resolution dated 14.11.1997 and therefore, the petitioners are very much affected. Based on their representations the syndicate resolved to rectify the discrepancies in the seniority list, but it has n