The court upheld the seniority determination based on merit and previous orders without arbitrary reassessment.

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed for direction directing the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner with regard to proper fixation of his seniority in the appropriate place in the cadre of Assistant Executive Engineer (Agriculture Engineering department) as on

01.01.2022 in accordance with law.

2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Engineer in the Agriculture Engineering Department by virtue of the government order in G.O.Ms.No.417 Agriculture (AAIII) Department, dated 06.10.1997. The petitioner joined the service on 12.05.1998 and he was regularized from the date of his joining. Thereafter, the second respondent published the provisional seniority list of the Assistant Engineer and also called for objections, if any. The petitioner’s name was placed in Sl. No.581 in the seniority list. But it was not fixed on the basis of the merit ranking among the selectees, it was rather placed on the basis of the communal roaster followed at the time of selection. Since the petitioner’s rank was fixed in the lower level, the petitioner submitted representation to revise the seniority list and refix the petitioner’s seniority in the proper place.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the date of joining shall be taken into account for the purpose of inter-se seniority among the persons who have been appointed to a particular post from more than one method of recruitment. But the third respondent, who was appointed in the year 2000, was placed above the several persons. Therefore, the respondents ought to have fixed the seniority list on merit ranking. In fact, after publishing the seniority list, the petitioner raised objection and even after the receipt of the same, no order has been passed so far. However, the third respondent was fixed above the petitioner by taking into account the date of her appointment i.e., 13.05.1998, instead of her actual date of joining ie., on 04.09.2000.

As of now her seniority has been placed in Sl. No.512 and the petitioner's seniority has been placed at Sl. No.581. Hence, he prayed to allow this Writ Petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed before this Court.

5. While pending the writ petition, the respondents 3 to 16 were impleaded in the Writ Petition. On perusal of the counter affidavit filed by the third respondent and on the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent, it is revealed that in the year 1997, the third respondent had participated in the interview for the appointment to the post of Assistant Engineer. Though she was selected and was eligible to be appointed, she was not appointed to the said post. Therefore, she approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.7187 of 1998 and the Tribunal passed an order on 16.05.2020, thereby directing the State Government to appoint the third respondent herein to the post of Assistant Engineer and to give her appointment with effect from the date of her immediate junior's appointment. Such notional appointment is ordered only for the purpose of seniority, increment etc., and not for claiming arrears of salary. In pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal, the government passed order in G.O.Ms.No.320 Agricultural (AAIII) Department, and ordered to appoint the third respondent notionally from the date of her immediate junior's appointment in the post of Assistant Engineering. She was also entitled to salary on par with her immediate junior.

6. Accordingly, the third respondent had joined duty to the post of Assistant Engineer on 04.09.2000. In the seniority list, she was placed