ORDER :

K.SURENDER, J.

This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceeding dated 23.02.2017 rejecting the petitioner's claim that she has to be given promotion as Executive Officer Grade – II/Head Clerk/Assistant and Executive Officer Grade – I with effect from the date on which her juniors got promotion, after including the petitioner's name in the State Level seniority list.

2. Briefly the facts of the case are as follows:

2.1. The petitioner was appointed as Bill Collector/Junior Assistant on compassionate ground in Panapakkam Town Panchayat, Vellore District on 24.11.1997. Her service was regularized from the date of her initial appointment vide the Government Order in G.O.(2D) No.47, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (TP-1) Department, dated 03.10.2006. Her probation was declared with effect from 24.11.1999 vide G.O.(D) No.322, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (TP-1) Department, dated 29.07.2008.

2.2. The petitioner passed the departmental test in the year 2000 and according to her, she is qualified for promotion to the post of Executive Officer Grade–II/Assistant/Head Clerk in the year 2000 itself. However, she continued to work as Bill Collector/Junior Assistant for more than 20 years without any promotion.

2.3. The petitioner made several representations to the respondents stating that her juniors had been promoted as Assistants while her seniority was overlooked. She sought revision of her seniority and promotion on par with her juniors, including P.S.Saravanan.

2.4. The petitioner relies upon the case of P.S. Saravanan, who was appointed as Bill Collector on 19.01.1998. The petitioner was appointed in the Vellore District Unit, whereas P.S.Saravanan was appointed in the Dharmapuri District Unit. The said P.S.Saravanan was promoted as Assistant in the DTP Unit on 04.01.2005. Similarly, candidates appointed in the year 2000, namely R.Sangeetha, M.Malarmaran, and T.Saravanan, were promoted in the years 2006 and 2009.

2.5. The petitioner received her first promotion on 01.09.2016 as Head Clerk (State Unit) in the panel for the year 2013–2014. Her second promotion was on 15.12.2019 as Executive Officer (Grade–I) in the panel for the year 2016–2017. Thereafter, she received her third promotion as Executive Officer (Selection Grade) in the panel for the year 2022–2023 on 01.08.2024. However, P.S. Saravanan, who is junior to the petitioner, received his first promotion on 04.01.2005 as Assistant (DTP Unit), his second promotion on 17.12.2013 as Executive Officer (Grade–I) in the panel for the year 2011–2012, his third promotion as Executive Officer (Selection Grade) on 17.06.2017 in the panel for the year 2015–2016, and his fourth promotion as Executive Officer (Special Grade) on 03.08.2024 in the panel for the year 2023–2024. Aggrieved by the same the petitioner submitted several representations. However, the respondents rejected her claim by the impugned proceedings dated 23.02.2017, against which the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

4.Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner seeks promotion on par with her juniors to the posts of Executive Officer Grade–II and Executive Officer Grade–I (Selection Grade), along with all monetary and other attendant benefits. He further submitted that for the higher posts of Selection Grade and Special Grade Executive Officer, the State was treated as the unit, whereas for the lower posts of Executive Officer Grade–I and Grade–II, the District was treated as the unit. This was in accordance with the Special Rules of the Tamil Nadu Town Panchayat Subordinate Service Rules. Since the said Rule was alleged to be discriminatory, O.A. No.2526 of 2019 and other cases were filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal held that the date of entry into the post