PRAYER

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, the first respondent herein made in Government letter No.9981/E3/2018-1, dated 30.05.2018 in so far as the petitioner is concerned, quash the same and direct the respondent 1 and 2 herein to the effect that the petitioner is deemed to have been promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in Rural Development Department with effect from the date on which the third respondent herein came to be promoted will all consequential service, monetary and attendant benefits with continuity of service and due seniority in its appropriate place in the post of Assistant Executive Engineer above the third respondent herein and disburse all the accrued monetary arrears and service benefits therein within a short date that may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner: Mr.K.Rajkumar

For Respondents: Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal, Additional Government Pleader for R1 and R2

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and perused the records.

2. The petitioner by the present writ petition has assailed the action of the respondents in not including the name of the petitioner for being promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer for the panel years 2017-2018 on par with the third respondent.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the crucial date for preparing the panel is April of every year; that on the crucial date, there was no disciplinary proceedings wherein a charge memo has been issued under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 (for short D & A Rules, 1955) for the respondents for not to consider the inclusion of the petitioner’s name in the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer.

4. The petitioner further contends that mere issuance of the charge memo under Rule 17(a) of D & A Rules, 1955, or any orders passed thereunder, cannot act as a bar for being included in the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer.

5. It is the further contention of the petitioner that though the District Collector has passed an order on 23.11.2016, visiting him with punishment / penalty under Rule 17(a) of D & A Rules, 1955 by awarding punishment of cutting of increment for six months without cumulative effect, the said order was set aside on appeal by the Appellate Authority i.e., the Director, Rural Development, Chennai, dated 31.10.2018 and as such on the crucial date i.e., April, 2017, there was no proceedings / charge memo or the criminal case pending against, for the respondents not to include his name in the panel for promotion.

6. Counter affidavit on behalf of the respondents is filed.

7. On behalf of the respondents, it is contended that though the crucial date for preparing the panel is 14th of April every year, as on the date of the preparation of panel for the year 2017-2018, since the petitioner was facing charges under Rule 17(a) of D & A Rules, 1955, the petitioner’s name was not considered for being included in the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer.

8. On behalf of the respondents, it is further contended that since, the order dated 23.11.2016 by which the petitioner was visited with penalty, was set aside in appeal vide order dated 31.10.2018, the respondents have granted notional promotion to the petitioner by including his name in the panel for the year 2015-2016 and reversed by revising the panel of the Assistant Engineer in the year 2015-2016.

9. On behalf of the respondents, it is also contended that since junior to the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer on 01.09.2016, the petitioner whose seniority is fixed at Serial No.18 has