Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

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

Advocates:
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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 72525

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASK. Kumaresh Babu, JM. Kumar – AppellantVersusState of Tamil Nadu – RespondentW.P.(MD) Nos.29090, 25418, 25772 & 32302 of 2025

Cases Referred (1)

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