The court addressed the process of reviewing seniority lists and the necessity for prompt consideration of pending objections before promotions are executed.

7.B.Ananthi ... Respondents PRAYER : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No.2234/A2/2024 dated 30.01.2026, on the file of the Respondent No.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the Respondent No.2 to revise the Impugned Tentative Seniority List dated 30.01.2026 by placing the petitioner preceding the Respondent No.6.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy Senior Counsel for M/s.Roy and Roy Associates For R1 to R5 : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No.2234/A2/2024 dated 30.01.2026, on the file of the Respondent No.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the Respondent No.2 to revise the Impugned Tentative Seniority List, dated 30.01.2026 by placing the petitioner preceding the Respondent No.6.

2. Heard Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5.

3. With the consent of the counsel appearing on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.

4. Though a challenge has been made to the tentative seniority list issued through the impugned proceedings dated 30.01.2026, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already filed objections to the tentative seniority list vide his representation dated 03.02.2026, and the same is still pending with the respondents. Therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner sought an appropriate direction for consideration of the objections raised by the petitioner.

5. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 submitted that the objections raised by the petitioner through the representation dated 03.02.2026 will be considered by the respondents before effecting any promotions.

6. In light of the above, this Court does not see any reason to go into the merits of the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the second respondent to consider the representation dated 03.02.2026 submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and to pass appropriate orders thereon before affecting any promotion and communicate the same to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs.