P K CHINNASAMY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) The appellant was appointed as Assistant Engineer (Motor Vehicles) in 1970 and was confirmed in that post in July, 1974. In September, 1974, the appellant's post was redesignated as Regional Transport Officer. In 1979, the appellant had to move the High Court for recognition of his seniority and grant of consequent service benefits including promotion and in April, 1983, the High Court directed his seniority to count from July, 1970, and for considering his claim for promotion as Deputy Transport Commissioner on the basis of his seniority. The State Government took quite some time to promote the appellant. A little later, for unknown reasons, the State Government allowed the officers junior to the appellant to officiate as Joint Transport Commissioners and the appellant found that he had been consistently overlooked and officers junior to him were getting appointed as Joint Transport Commissioners. The appellant again approached the High Court. During the pendency of the later petition before the High Court, the appellant who was then Deputy Transport Commissioner at Coimbatore and had proceeded on casual leave for four days found himself replaced and transferred to Madras. At Madras, the appellant was not given posting and work commensurate to his status. On this occasion when he moved the High Court alleging mala fides and improper treatment to him as a public officer, the High Court refused to interfere.

(3.) We have perused the civil appeal, the further affidavits on behalf of the appellant and the counter-affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents and we have also heard learned counsel at length. After the matter was heard, we came to the conclusion that the appellant was not being properly treated as a public officer and adjourned the matter to give an opportunity to the respondent-Government to give the appellant an appropriate posting and allot proper work to him. The matter had to be adjourned on three occasions on representation of counsel for the State that orders were going to be made, yet nothing happened and a stage was reached when even counsel found it embarrassing to ask for further adjournment.