Order

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.)

Writ of declaration has been instituted challenging the appointment of the contesting respondents to the post of Junior Administrative Assistant in the services of the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority dated 27.11.2019.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would mainly contend that the appointment of the respondents to the post of Junior Administrative Assistant was not done in accordance with the recruitment rules in force and therefore those appointments are to be declared as null and void. He would contend that certain appointments to the said posts were made on extraneous considerations which resulted in denying promotional opportunity to the writ petitioners who were appointed to the post of Office Assistant in the same year ie., in 2019. Since they are losing their opportunity of promotion, the petitioners have chosen to file the present writ petitions.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority would oppose by stating that the writ petitioners were appointed to the post of Office Assistant in April 2019 and the contesting respondents were appointed to the post of Junior Administrative Assistant in November 2019. Qualification for both the posts of Junior Administrative Assistant and Office Assistant was common and common recruitment process was conducted. Having accepted the post of Office Assistant, now at this length of time, they cannot challenge the appointment of the respondents made to the post of Junior Administrative Assistant. Thus, the writ petition is to be rejected.

4. The respective learned counsel for the contesting respondents would submit that they were appointed in November 2019 and working in the post of Junior Administrative Assistant for more than five years. The services of the contesting respondents were regularised and now they are working as permanent employees in Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority. The writ petitions have been instituted belatedly and have to be rejected.

5. This Court has considered the rival submissions made by the parties to the lis on hand.

6. Admittedly, recruitment rules were not followed. But, the services of the contesting respondents in the post of Junior Administrative Assistants were regularised and they are working as permanent employees. The writ petition in W.P.No.35315 of 2024 came to be instituted in the year 2024 after a lapse of five years from the date of appointment and therefore the settled appointments need not be unsettled merely on the ground that the petitioners claim that their promotional opportunities are denied.

7. Promotions per se cannot be claimed as an absolute right. Promotions are to be made strictly in accordance with the rules applicable to the particular post. The petitioners were admittedly appointed as Office Assistants. Whenever their turn comes for promotion, in the order of seniority and in accordance with the rules, their case will be considered strictly in accordance with the promotion rules applicable. Therefore, in order to secure promotion to the next higher post of Junior Administrative Assistants, the petitioners cannot be allowed to challenge the appointment of the respondents, who were appointed in the year 2019 to the post of Junior Administrative Assistant and their services were also regularised in the sanctioned posts in the time scale of pay. Settled appointments cannot be unsettled after a lapse of several years, which would affect the livelihood of those employees. That apart, the petitioners have slept over their claim for long years and now they cannot wake up and knock the doors of the Court to unsettle the appointments which were confirmed by the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority.

8. In respect of the allegations set out by the petitioners that the recruitment rules are not followed in the recruitment to various posts in Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, the issue has been settled by this C