Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 72525
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K. Kumaresh Babu, J
M. Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
W.P.(MD) Nos.29090, 25418, 25772 & 32302 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: G.Sankaran, K.Hema Karthikeyan, V.Panneerselvam, H.Mohammed Imran, S.Chellapandian
For the Respondents: M.Siddharthan, M.Ajmal Khan, F.Deepak, V.R.Shanmuganathan
The creation, abolition, and restructuring of posts are matters within the exclusive domain of the employer. The power of judicial review is limited and can only be exercised if the decision is found to be contrary to constitutional or statutory provisions, patently arbitrary, or vitiated by mala fides.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 309 - Creation and abolition of posts - Government policy - Interference by Court - Judicial review - The court held that the creation and abolition of posts and restructuring of cadres fall within the exclusive domain of the employer - Court cannot sit in appeal over the decision of the employer unless such action is shown to be contrary to constitutional or statutory provisions, patently arbitrary, or vitiated by malafides. (Paras 13, 18, 19)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, who were working in the technical wing of the Department of Economics and Statistics, challenged a Government Order which converted several technical posts into ministerial posts. They contended that this conversion negatively impacted their promotional opportunities and that no reasons were assigned for the modification of proposals. The ministerial staff supported the decision, noting the long-standing lack of promotional avenues for their cadre.
Findings of Court:
The Court observed that the government had considered various aspects, including the need to balance the technical and ministerial wings and the financial implications of the conversion. It found no arbitrariness or lack of reasonableness in the policy decision and maintained that the Court's scope of interference in such policy matters is limited to judicial review.
Issues: Whether the Government Order converting technical posts to the ministerial cadre is arbitrary or violative of constitutional provisions, and whether the Court should interfere in the policy decision of the employer regarding cadre restructuring.
Ratio Decidendi: The power to structure, restructure, create, or abolish posts is an employer’s prerogative. Unless an action is proven to be unconstitutional, arbitrary, or malicious, the Court will not substitute its judgment for that of the executive branch.
Result: Writ Petitions dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of the background regarding challenges to government order on post conversion. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented by the petitioners against the conversion of posts. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments of the respondents and legal basis for employer's discretion in cadre restructuring. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. arguments by the impleaded ministerial respondents supporting the changes. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. court's reasoning on the limited scope of judicial review in employer's policy decisions. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
W.P.(MD) No.29090 of 2025:
1.M.Kumar
2.A.Abishek
3.P.Muralimanickam
4.M.Nivedhitha
5.M.Kumaresan
6.S.Gowtham
7.G.Amirthaharshini
8.T.Jegadeesh
9.P.Manoranjitham
10.T.Balamurugan
11.A.Ramya
12.C.Pushpa Leelajayarani
13.P.Karthika
14.I.Mustaq Ahamed
15.A.Durai Basakar
16.G.Karpagam
17.A.Abirami
18.A.Ragavi Meera
19.J.Jerlin Obhelia
20.G.Ranya
21.A.Sowmiya
22.B.Nithya
23.B.Sathesh
24.M.Maveeran
25.R.Karuppusamy
26.K.Arul Priya
27.M.Velmurugan
28.T.Prasanth
29.C.Arun Kumar
30.V.Akhila
31.C.Sivan
32.M.Ajith Kumar
33.R.Sainath
34.K.Gayathiri
35.M.Muniyappan
36.M.Rathimeena
37.C.Brindha
38.P.Prema
39.K.C.Sri Senbagavalli
40.A.Vanisri
41.R.Pravin
42.P.Pandiavel
43.V.Kanmani
44.N.Shalini
45.R.Muneeswaran
46.I.Arumugam
47.P.Sri Seenivasan
48.P.Pachiyappan
49.S.Usha
50.P.Durgambika
51.D.Kalpanadevi
52.J.Mahalakshmi
53.K.Aravindhkumar ... Petitioners
-vs-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Additional Chief Secretary
Planning, Development and
Special Initiatives Department
Secretariate, Chennai
2.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Principal Secretary
Finance Department
Secretariate, Chennai
3.The Principal Secretary / Commissioner
Department of Economics and Statistics
DMS Campus, Thenapet, Chennai-600 006 ... Respondents
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.118 Planning and Development and Special initiatives Department dated 07.08.2025 and consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings in Letter No.19637/C1/2025 dated 12.09.2025 and quash the same and further direct the respondents to permit to continue the technical post without any interference.
For Petitioners : Mr.G.Sankaran, Senior Counsel
assisted by Mr.K.Hema Karthikeyan
For Respondents : Mr.M.Siddharthan
Additional Government Pleader
W.P.(MD) No.25418 of 2025:
1.S.Karthik Kannan
2.R.Thangaraj
3.K.Shanmugapriya
4.S.Maruthu Pandiyan
5.S.Natarajan ... Petitioners
-vs-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Additional Chief Secretary
Planning, Development and
Special Initiatives Department
Secretariate, Chennai
2.The State of Tamil Nadu
rep.by its Principal Secretary
Finance Department
Secretariate, Chennai
3.The Principal Secretary / Commissioner
Department of Economics and Statistics
DMS Campus, Thenapet, Chennai-600 006
4.Suresh Subash Chandrabose
5.A.Babu
6.T.Iseravel Thankaraj
7.Santhanakrishnan
8.S.Muthukumar Subramanian
9.S.Ganesan
10.K.Malarvizhi Karmegam
11.Hariharan Chidambaram
12.S.Kavitha
13.Muthulakshmi
14.A.Sankari ... Respondents
[R4 to R14 are impleaded vide court
order dated 25.09.2025 in W.M.P.(MD)
No.20503 of 2025]
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.Ms.No.118 Planning and Development and Special Initiatives Department dated 07.08.2025 in so far as conversion of Statistical Inspector (District Headquarters) 32 posts as Superintendent and consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings in Letter No.19637/C1/2025 dated 12.09.2025 and quash the same and further direct the respondents to permit to continue the technical post without any interference.
For Petitioners : Mr.V.Panneerselvam
For Respondents : Mr.M.Siddharthan
Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3
Mr.V.R.Shanmuganathan for R4 to R14
W.P.(MD) No.25772 of 2025:
1.G.Kri
