Advocates:
['M/S P VIJENDRAN', '', 'V CHITHRA', 'G SARAVANA KUMAR', 'CHENNAI']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 8.6.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH

AND

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI

W.A.No.866 of 2018

S.Kanagasundaram

Appellant/Petitioner

Versus

1 The District Collector

Collectorate Nagapattinam District

2 The District Revenue Officer

Collector Office Nagapattinam and District

3 The Revenue Divisional Officer

Revenue Divisional Office

Nagapattinam and District

Respondents/Respondents

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed filed under Clause 15 of the Letters

Patent against the order dated 9.3.2018 passed in W.P.No.5279 of

2018 on the file of this court.

W.P.No.5279 of 2018:

Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India,

praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus

calling for the records from the respondent pertaining to the

impugned Memo. Na. Ka. No. 24899/2016 A2 dt 29.1.2018 issued by

the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently to direct

the respondents No.1 and 2 to demote the petitioner from the

post of Revenue Inspector to the Village Administrative Officer.

For appellant

: Mr.P.Vijendran

For respondent : Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram,

Special Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the court was made by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.)

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and

Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram, learned Special Government Pleader,

who takes notice on behalf of respondents.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. This intra court appeal is filed by the petitioner being

aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

3. It appears that the petitioner, who was serving as

Village Administrative Officer from 7.1.2008, was promoted as

Revenue Inspector on 19.8.2016, however, subsequently, he opted

for demotion to the post of the Village Administrative Officer

on the ground of his family circumstances, by giving a

representation dated 21.11.2016 and since it was rejected, he

had come up with the writ petition contending that such

rejection is contrary to the precedent orders he had furnished

in the typed set of papers in the writ petition.

4. In para 3 of the order, the learned Single Judge has

observed as under:-

"A perusal of the aforementioned orders does

not show the reason for acceding to the

request of the officers therein seeking

demotion to the lower post. But, in the

present case, the reason given by the

District Collector, Nagapattinam that Section

47(1) and (2) of the Tamil Nadu Government

Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016

failed to support the case of the petitioner

for his demotion, is in order. Secondly, the

representation given by the petitioner does

not show any single reason for his demotion

to the post of Village Administrative

Officer, because nowhere he has pleaded with

the health ground or administrative ground or

family ground for his decision to go back to

the post of Village Administrative Officer,

which is only lower in rank. Thirdly, he has

not specified whether he has relinquished his

promotion for a particular period, namely,

three years or more than three years. In

that view of the matter, the first

respondent-District Collector, Nagapattinam

has rightly rejected the request of the

petitioner. I also do not find any infirmity

or flaw in the impugned order. Accordingly,t

he writ petition fails and it is

dismissed. ..."

3. It appears that the appellant had not expressed his

unwillingness at the time of his promotion from the post of

Village Administrative Officer to the post of Revenue Inspector,

but, subsequently, he wants to relinquish and get retained in

the post of Village Administrative Officer for his family

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

circumstances, Be that as it may, now, the learned counsel

appe