IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON: 12.06.2024 DELIVERED ON: 08.07.2024 CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR and THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KUMARESH BABU W.A.No. 631 of 2023 R. Joseph .. Appellant Vs

1. Tamil Nadu General and Distribution Corporation Ltd., Rep by its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, No.14, Anna Salai, Chennai-600002.

2. The Chief Engineer/Personal, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd., No.800, Anna Salai, Chennai -600002.

3.The Superintendent Engineer, Kadamparai Generation Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Minparai - 642101 ..Respondents Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 12.09.2022 in W.P.No.39308 of 2016.

For Appellant : Ms. S.Meenakshi For Respondents : Mr.David Sundar Singh, Standing Counsel

J U D G M E N T

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.

Aggrieved by the order passed by the writ court in W.P.No.39308 of

2016, dated 12.09.2022, the present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant.

Facts in brief:

2. The appellant joined the service of the 2nd respondent as a Helper on 07.09.1994 and was subsequently promoted to the post of Foreman Grade I. The next avenue for promotion is Special Grade Foreman. Even though vacancies arose for the post of Special Grade Foreman before his retirement on 30.09.2014, the respondent authority did not take steps to fill the posts, citing the pendency of a case related to Foreman Grade I. After his retirement, his juniors were granted promotion. The appellant filed a writ petition in W.P.No.39308 of 2016 seeking notional promotion and consequential benefits on par with his juniors. The writ court, by order dated 12.09.2022, dismissed the said writ petition. Challenging the same, the present writ appeal has been filed.

3. The learned counsel for the appeallant submitted that the appellant became eligible for further promotion to the post of Special Grade Foreman. Though his name was placed at serial no.1 in the seniority list and approved for promotion to the said post by order of the respondent dated 22.09.2014, the respondent authority delayed the process without any valid reason. The learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that the respondent Board sent communication regarding the promotion to the post of Special Grade Foreman on 18.09.2014 to the Divisions of Kadamparai Circle, and the suitability report was issued on 22.09.2014 in favor of the appellant. Subsequently, the final suitability report was also obtained on 26.09.2014, which was before the date of retirement of the appellant. Hence, the contention of the respondent that the panel list for the post of Special Grade Foreman was issued on 11.12.2014 is not valid in granting promotion even after the preparation of the final suitability report on 26.09.2014. Therefore, the order passed by the writ court without considering the above factual aspects is liable to be set aside.

4. Per contra, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondent Board, by proceedings No. 35 dated 23.07.2014, constituted a Committee to assess the promotional avenues for regular work establishment employees working in all the Hydro Generation Circles. In view of the above, four additional posts of Special Grade Foreman were created, and the existing one post was increased to five posts of Special Grade Foreman.

5. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent-Board further submitted that the respondent-Board sent a communication dated 18.09.2014 requesting the subordinate officers from all the divisions in the Kadamparai Circle to provide suitability reports for the post of Special Grade Foreman. A suitability report in favor of the appellant dated

22.09.2014 was received on 23.09.2014, and the final suitability reports from other divisions were received by the 3rd respondent's office on 26.09.2014. The communication dated 18.09.2014 was for a supplementary list and not the final promotion panel list. The final