IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR C.K.Narayanan ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Secretary to Government Education Department, Fort St. George, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009.

2. The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 600 006.

3. The District Education Officer Gudalore, Nilgiri District.

..Respondent(s)

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No. 498/A1/ 2016 dated 02.2017 (Signed on 14.02.2017) and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to promote the Petitioner as Junior Assistant notionally on par with his Juniors (i.e.with effect from 1989 the date on which his juniors were promoted) with all other service and monetary benefits in the light of the order passed in W.P.No. 13559/ 06 dated 09.04.2012 and pass such suitable orders or other orders as this Honourable with all other service and monetary benefits.

For Petitioner(s): M/s. R.S.Anandan For Respondent(s): Mrs.P.Rajarajeswari, G.A.

ORDER

The petitioner challenges the order passed by the third respondent in proceedings Na.Ka. No. 498/A1/2016 dated 02.2017 (signed on 14.02.2017).

2. By the said order, the petitioner’s request for grant of retrospective promotion to the post of Junior Assistant with effect from 15.03.1989 came to be rejected.

3. The petitioner was initially appointed as an Office Assistant in the Panchayat Union on 30.07.1974. Pursuant to the Government’s policy decision to provincialise local body staff, as mandated by G.O. Ms. No. 857, Education Department, dated 23.05.1981, the petitioner was absorbed into the Education Department as a Government servant with effect from 01.06.1981. During the course of his service, he was promoted to the post of Record Clerk on 01.11.2000 and thereafter to the post of Lab Assistant on 06.07.2005. Following the said promotion, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation and retired from service on 30.06.2012.

4. Subsequent to attaining the age of superannuation and retiring from service on 30.06.2012, the petitioner came to learn that several of his juniors in the feeder category had been granted promotion to the post of Junior Assistant prior to his retirement. Noticing this discrepancy in the matter of seniority and promotion, the petitioner submitted a formal representation to the respondents seeking notional promotion to the post of Junior Assistant on par with his juniors, together with consequential revision of his pensionary benefits.

5. However, by the impugned order dated 14.02.2017, the respondents rejected the petitioner’s request. The petitioner contends that such rejection is arbitrary and contrary to the settled principle that a senior is entitled to promotion on par with his juniors, provided the vacancy existed and the junior was promoted during the senior’s tenure of service.

6. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing for the State, and perused the materials placed on record.

7. In the counter affidavit, the learned counsel appearing for the State contended that though the petitioner was absorbed into Government service in the year 1981 pursuant to G.O. Ms. No. 857, he was formally allotted to a school under the Education Department only in the year 1987. Therefore, according to the State, the petitioner’s eligibility for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant ought to be reckoned only from the date of such allotment, i.e., from the year

1987, and not from the date of initial absorption. The State further contended that though the petitioner was granted subsequent promotions to higher posts, he did not raise any grievance during his active service. Having submitted the representation only after attaining superannuation, the peti