Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON : 19.04.2022 PRONOUNCED ON : 04.11.2022 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY W.P.(MD)Nos.12670, 13764 and 20484 of 2017 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.9772 to 9774, 10742, 10743, 16754 and 16755 of 2017 W.P.(MD)No.12670 of 2017:
1. P. Murugavel
2. K. Carolin Mary
3. A.Rajeswari
4. K. Rajasekaran
5. Rathinapandi
6. Senapathi
7. G. Hemalatha
8. Vetriselvan
9. A.Damodharan 10.S. Murugesan 11.T. Suryakumar
12.S.Sudharani
13.M.Ukkirapandi
14.S.Siva Balaji 15.S.Amirtharaj
16.T. Sudarson
17.M.Syed Mohamed Shameem
18.R.Sasipriya
19.D. Raghupathi 20.C. Mariyappan
21.Sathiyamoorthi Ambedkumar
22.B.Muthulakhsmi
23.A.Sakthivel
24.M. Amirtharani
25.S.Ilayaraja
26.D. Karthikeyan
27.M.Ramkumar
28. Eswari ... Petitioners vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2. The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
3. The Director/Commissioner, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
4. The District Collector, Collectorate Building, Dindigul District.
5. R.Kamalakannan
6. C.Balamurugan
7. A.Senthil Kumaran
8. P. Ravikumar
9. R. Maduraiveeran
10.A.Manoharan
11.S.Vasantha
12. P.Saroja
13.R.Sridharan
14. V.Kandeepan 15.P.Rajasekaran
16.P.Patchaimuthu
17.K.Arumugam
18.S.Mohammed Siddiq
19.M.Nagendran
20.S.Kulanthai Therasa
21.S.Roja
22.K.Karmegam
23.M.Palanichamy
24.G.Santhidevi
25.V.Srinivasa Raghavan
26. M.Enjalin Martha
27.M.Palanichamy
28.S.Thilagam
29. V.Mariyammal
30.K. Balasundaram 31.M. Buvaneshwari
32.P. Vasuki
33.K.Gurusamy 34.V. Kathiresan
35.K.Kalaiselvi 36.K.Tamilselvi
37.T. Kanmani
38.T. Mahalakshmi 39.P. Arunkumaran 40.K.Deepalakhsmi
41.P. Saraswathi
42.H.Ameethaselvi
43.C.Sarojini
44.P.Kasthuri Thilagam
45.K.P. Ramanathan 46.R. Muthulakhsmi
47.K.Sumathi
48. A.Gopalakrishnan 49.R.K.Ramachandran
50.R. Sumathi
51.P.Nambidevi
52.R.P. Buvaneshwari
53.M. Kavitha 54.P. Suganthi
55.M.Alagumani
56.R.Balasubramanian
57.A.Ilangotharan
58.S. Rajamohan 59.S. Muthusamy
60.P.Deisy Flora
61.K.Perinbamani
62. R. Ramakrishnan
63. Sundaravadivel
64. Dhanapandian
65. Thangadurai 66. R. Suganthi
67.P. Anitha Ruby ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Orders passed by the 4th respondent in Na.Ka. No.2292/2011/C.t. 1(1), dated 25.11.2011, Na.Ka.No.2292/2011/ C.t.1> dated 28.12.2011, Na.Ka. No.2292/2011/C.t.1, dated 29.06.2012 and Impugned Seniority List issued by the 4th respondent in his Proceedings Na.Ka.No.135/2014/Vu.Va.1, dated 29.02.2016 and consequentially the Order of Promotion issued by the 4th respondent in his Proceedings Na.Ka.No.1759/2017/Vu.Va.2(1), dated 17.06.2017 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently, to direct the 4th respondent to draw the inter-se seniority list of Assistant Directly Recruited through TNPSC and Promotee Assistants by placing the directly recruited Assistants ahead of the Promotee Assistants in the light of the Proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Letter No.5669/OTD-C3/2006, dated 08.07.2011 and in the light of the fact that the Promotee Assistants from the Post of Typist did not complete the One Year Junior Assistant Training as contemplated under Rule-30 (C) of the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules.
For Petitioners : Mr.J.Lawrance For R1, 3 and 4 :Mr.R.Baskaran Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam Government Advocate (Civil side)
For R2 : Mr.J.Anand Kumar For R12 to 29, 31, 37 to
39, 42, 45 to 47, 49, 55 &
60 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For R32 to 34, 36, 41.
43, 48, 51, 54 & 56 : Mr.S.Balamurugan For R5 to 11, 30, 35, 40, 44, 50, 52, 53, 55, 57 to
58 & 61 to 67 : No appearance W.P.(MD)No.13764 of 2017:
P.Murugavel ... Petitioner vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2. The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
3. The Director/Commissioner, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
4. The District Collector, Collectorate Building, Dindigul District.
5.K.Gurusamy
6.M.Buvaneswari
7.V.Kathiresan 8.K.Kalaiselvi
9.Vasuki ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Orders of Promotion issued by the 4th respondent in Na.Ka.No.1759/2017/C.t. 2(1), dated 19.07.2017, in favour of the 5th respondent, Na.Ka.No. 1759/2017/C.t.2(1), dated 19.07.2017, in favour of the 6th respondent, Na.Ka.No.1759/2017/C.t.2(1), dated 19.07.2017, in favour of the 7th respondent Na.Ka.No.1759/2017/C.t.2(1), dated 19.07.2017, in favour of the 8th respondent and Na.Ka.No.1759/2017/C.t.2(1), dated 19.07.2017, in favour of the 9th respondent and to quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Lawrance For R1, 3 and 4 :Mr.R.Baskaran Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.S.Kameswaran Government Advocate (Civil side)
For R2 : Mr.J.Anand Kumar For R5 & 7 : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai For R6, 8 & 9 : Mr.S.Balamurugan W.P.(MD)No.20484 of 2017:
P.Murugavel ... Petitioner vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Secretariat, Chennai.
2. The Secretary, Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Frazer Bridge Road, V.O.C. Nagar, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.
3. The Director/Commissioner, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Panagal Building, Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
4. The District Collector, Collectorate Building, Dindigul District.
5.The Personal Assistant to the Collector, (Panchayat Development), Dindigul District, Dindigul.
6.C.Malliga
7.P.Maruthairaj
8.M.K.Sundararaj
9.K.Sathiyamoorthi
10.L.Rayappan
11.P.Saravana Krishnan
12.S.Uma
13.K.Maharajan
14.R.Kamalakannan 15.R.M.Arumugam 16.C.Balamurugan
17.M.P.Sivasubramanian
18.A.Senthil Kumaran
19.P.Ravikumar
20.I.Shanthi
21.M.Tamilarasi 22.A.Dharmaraj
23.R.Renugadevi 24.R.Manoharan
25.R.Maduraiveeran
26.A.Manoharan
27.G.Sakthivel
28.K.Thanakodeeswaran
29.M.Vijayalakshmi
30.R.Nagalakshmi
31.S.Vasantha
32.P.Saroja
33.R.Sridharan
34.V.Kandeepan 35.P.Rajasekaran
36.P.Patchaimuthu
37.K.Arumugam
38.S.Mohammed Siddiq
39.M.Nagendran
40.S.Kulanthai Therasa
41.S.Roja
42.K.Karmegam
43.M.Palanichamy
44.G.Shanthidevi
45.V.Seenivasaraghavan
46.M.Angelin Martha
47.M.Palanichamy
48.S.Thilagam
49.V.Mariammal
50.K.Balasundaram 51.M.Buvaneshwari
52.P.Vasuki
53.K.Gurusamy 54.V.Kathiresan 55.K.Kalaiselvi 56.K.Tamilselvi
57.T.Kanmani
58.T.Mahalakshmi 59.P.Arunkumaran
60.P.Saraswathi
61.H.Amithaselvi
62.C.Sarojini
63.K.P.Ramanathan 64.R.Muthulakshmi
65.K.Sumathi
66.A.Gopala Krishnan 67.R.K.Ramachandran
68.P.Nambidevi
69.R.P.Buvaneshwari
70.M.Kavitha
71.M.Alagumani
72.R.Balasubramanian
73.S.Sundaravadivel
74.A.Ilangotharan
75.S.Rajmohan
76.S.Muthusamy 77.P.Deisy Flora
78.K.Perinbamani
79.R.Ramakrishnan 80.S.Dhanapandian 81.M.Thangadurai
82.M.Dhanalakshmi
83.Na.Balasubramanian
84.T.Chandrasekaran
85.K.Usharani
86.T.Balakrishnan
87.M.Santhakumari
88.S.Nagarajan
89.M.Marthamuthu
90.A.Selvi
91.C.Santhanalakshmi
92.P.Balamurugan
93.A.Abraham
94.R.Marimuthu
95.A.Arockiya George 96.D.Balasubramaniam
97.E.Irulayee
98.P.Suguna ... Respondents (R6 to R98 impleaded, vide Court order, dated 13.12.2017, in W.M.P.(MD)No.18366 of 2017)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Orders passed by the 4th respondent vide his proceedings Na.Ka.No.
135/2014/C.t1, dated 30.08.2017 and to quash the same as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Lawrance For R1, 3 to 5 :Mr.R.Baskaran Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.S.Kameswaran Government Advocate (Civil side)
For R2 : Mr.J.Anand Kumar For R14, 28 to 32, 34 to 39, 41, 43 to 49, 51 to 55, 57 to
72, 77, 78 & 84 : Mr.S.Balamurugan For R6 to 13, 15 to 27, 33, 40, 42, 50, 56, 73 to 76, 79 to 83 and 85 to 98 : No appearance *****
COMMON ORDER
The Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.12670 of 2017 is filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned orders passed by the 4th respondent, dated 25.11.2011, 28.12.2011 and 29.06.2012 and impugned Seniority List issued by the 4th respondent in his proceedings, dated 29.02.2016 and consequential promotion in proceedings, dated 17.06.2017 and consequently, to direct the 4th respondent to draw the inter-se seniority list of Assistant Directly Recruited through TNPSC and Promotee Assistants by placing the directly recruited Assistants ahead of the Promotee Assistants in the light of the Proceedings of the 2nd respondent in Letter No.5669/OTD-C3/2006, dated 08.07.2011 and in the light of the fact that the Promotee Assistants from the Post of Typist did not complete the One Year Junior Assistant Training as contemplated under Rule-30 (C) of the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules.
2. The petitioners in this writ petition were appointed as Assistants in the year 2012 through TNPSC. The 1st petitioner namely, Murugavel, joined the office of the Block Development Officer on 28.12.2012. The petitioners had participated in the Combined Subordinate Service Examination I for the year 2009-2011 and wrote the examination on 30.07.2011 and the results were published on 08.06.2012. Upon the successful participation in the examination, he was called for counselling held on 23.11.2012 and on the very same day, he chose the place and was directed to report the 3rd and 4th respondents on 30.11.2012, to get an appointment order and was also directed to meet the 4th respondent and the 1st petitioner reported before the 4th respondent in person and the petitioner was made to wait until 24.12.2012. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued an appointment order on 24.12.2012 and the petitioner joined the service on 28.12.2012. Though the persons who are selected along with the petitioner were directed to appear before the 4th respondent on various dates commencing from 23.11.2012 all of them were directed to wait until 24.12.2012 and had joined only on 27.12.2012. The 4th respondent vide his proceedings, dated 14.07.2014, issued a tentative inter-se-seniority list of directly recruited Assistants and Promotee Assistants and also called for objections. The tentative inter-se-seniority list was prepared taking into consideration of the date of joining in the cadre of Assistants irrespective of the fact whether they were Promotee Assistants or directly recruited Assistants.
3. The contention of the petitioners are that even prior to the petitioners'
joining, all other Junior Assistants and Typists working in the same Department in Dindigul District were given promotion as Assistant and they were made to join prior to the petitioners so as to place them above than the directly recruited Assistants in the inter-se-seniority list. That is the reason why, the 4th respondent made the petitioners to wait to join till 27.12.2012 though they were selected much earlier. The contention of the petitioners are that since they were directly recruited Assistants they should be placed above the Promotee Assistants, since the Promotee Assistants have not completed degree examination whereas the petitioners have completed degree examination. The further contention of the petitioners are that the 4th respondent without following due process of law prepared the above mentioned seniority list, wherein, the respondents 5 and 6, respondents 9 to 32, and respondents 57 to 59 who have been promoted as Assistants in the year 2012, were placed ahead of directly recruited Assistants. Further, the respondent Nos. 7, 8, 60 to 67 who have been promoted in the year 2013 were also placed ahead of the directly recruited Assistants. Further, the respondent Nos.33 to 56 who were employed as Typists and have been promoted as Assistants in the year 2011 were also ahead of the directly recruited Assistants. As far as the respondent 62 is concerned, he has bee
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
