O R D E R

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus challenging the proceeding passed in Na.Ka. No.31764/2015/A1 dated 17.06.2017 and the subsequent Rejection of the Review Petition in Na.Ka. No.31764/2015/K1 dated 19.01.2018 issued by the respondent herein rejecting the claim of the petitioner with regard to refixing the seniority quash the same and direct the respondent to place the above V.Poovendran and S.Sampath Kumar in the Panel of Class IV Officer for the year 2017-18.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Office Assistant in the respondent Department on 30.10.1985. Thereafter, he was promoted as Bill Collector in 1988. He got further promotion to the post of Assistant in the year 2006. The seniority list for the post of Assistant was published as on 01.03.2009 fixing the seniority of various Assistants including the petitioner, where the petitioner's name has been found at S.No.37 and the names of two other individuals viz., Puvendiran and Sampath Kumar were found in the said list at S.No.41 and 43.

3. Based on this seniority list, promotion was given to the petitioner and others to the post of Manager and in this regard, order was issued on 19.09.2013, pursuant to which he joined the said promoted post of Manager on

20.09.2013. Others have also joined in the said post of Manager at various places on which further seniority list has been prepared for the post of Manager, where the petitioner's name has been placed at S.No.61, whereas the names of the other two candidates who stood as juniors to the petitioner in the earlier seniority list to the post of Assistant at S.Nos.41 and 43 have now been placed at S.Nos.27 and 28 well ahead of the petitioner in the post of Manager.

4. In view of this seniority list now has been issued in the post of Manager, which according to the respondent was based on the date and time of joining in the promoted post by the candidates, as the petitioner admittedly joined on 20.09.2013 after noon, whereas the other candidates have joined in the forenoon. Therefore, those who joined in the forenoon were placed as seniors than the petitioner. Because of this, the seniority list where the petitioner has been pushed back far behind so many juniors, he wanted the set right the anomaly. Therefore, he has given a representation to the respondent. Since the same was not considered, he approached this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.No.32687 of 2016, where a direction was given by this Court by an order dated 19.09.2016 directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and to decide the plea raised therein on merits.

5. In response to the said order passed by this Court, having considered the request of the petitioner, the respondent has passed an order on 17.06.2017, wherein they have stated the following:

“ ghh;it 3 kw;Wk; 5y; fhdqk; j';fsJ nky;KiwaPl;L kD ghhi; t 4 kw;Wk; 5y; fhdqk; cahe; Pjpkd;w Mizapd;go ghprPyid bra;ag;gl;L Fkhughisak; efuhl;rp. fzff; h; jpU khjtd; (k) cjfkzl; yk; efuhl;rp. cjtp tUtha; mYtyh;. jpU/nt/rz;Kfk; MfpnahuJ Ml;nrgizfs; fHP ; fzl; fhuz'f; Sff; hf epuhfhpff; gg; LfpwJ/ tFg;g[ ? V tiu j";rht{h;. kJiu. nryk;. jpUbeyn; typ kw;Wk; ntY}h; Mfpa 5 kzl; y myFfspy; Kjepiy guhkhpff; g;gLfpwJ/ tFg;g[ ? IV?ypUe;J tFg;g[?II?w;fhd gzpK:g;g[ gl;oay; khepy mstpy; guhkhpff; gg; LfpwJ/ mt;thW khepy mstpy; gzpK:g;g[ gl;oaypy; nrhf; ;fg;gLk; gzpahshf; s; gzpapy; nrhe; ;j njjp kw;Wk; xnu ehspy; gzpapy; nrhe; ;jpUg;gpd; Kw;gfy;-gpw;gfy; gzpapy; nrhe; ;Js;s epiyapy; jdpahf; is Kw;gfypy; gpwe;j njjpapd; mog;gilapy;

Kd;Dhpik tH'f; ,ayhJ/

nkYk; Kw;gfy; kw;Wk; gpw;gfy; gzpapy; nrhe; j; ij xnu ehshf bfhz;L gzpK:g;g[ gl;oay; jahh; bra;J tH';f nfhhp ,nj nghd;w Ml;nrgizfSf;F ,t;tYtyf Fwpg;ghize/f/vz;/31764-2015- nf1.ehs;/25/05/16?y; cj;njr gzpK:g;g[ gl;oay; tpjp 25 jkpHe; hL efuhl;rp gzpahshf; s; bghJ tpjpfs; go tFg;g[ ?IV gzpapy; nrhe; ;j ehs; kw;Wk; mthf; s; gzpgh[ pe;j myfpy; mthf; sJ Kjepiy kw;Wk; jdpahf; sJ gpwe;j njjp Mfpatw;is fzff; py; bfhzL; t