C O ARUMUGAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) Heard counsel on both sides. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal which allowed the appeals of respondents 3 to 5 and quashed the temporary promotions of the appellants 2 to 4 as Deputy Transport Commissioners.

(3.) On 23/03/1988 the Tamil Nadu government approved a panel of six Regional Transport Officers including the four appellants before us for the purpose of temporary promotion to the cadre of Deputy Transport Commissioners. Respondents 3 to 5 who are seniors to the appellants were, however, not included in the panel. They were excluded from the panel either on account of disciplinary proceedings initiated or criminal case pending against them. In view of pendency of such proceedings, the government had decided to overlook their promotions as Deputy Transport Commissioner. The said respondents preferred writ petitions before the High court of Madras questioning the exclusion of their names in the approved panel and seeking direction to include their names therein. The writ petitions were transferred to the Tamil Nadu Administrative tribunal. The tribunal on consideration of the relevant rules has observed that the panel for promotion to the post of Deputy Transport Commissioner was contrary to Rule 4 of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules, since it was not published in the gazette and notice of preparation of the list was not given to senior officials who were excluded form the list. It was also observed that the list so prepared would be valid only for one year from the date of approval of the list and after expiry of one year, the list would not be valid. The tribunal after referring to Rule 39 (d) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules said: