K MADALAIMUTHU Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in these three petitions challenge the common order passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.As. Nos.779 of 1995, 1067 of 1995 and 1068 of 1995. THE petitioner in W.P. No.16806 of 1998 and W.P. No.1548 of 1999 Mr.K. Madalaimuthu and the petitioner in W.P. No.1549 of 1999 Mr.A. Arumuga Nainar are directly recruited as District Registrars in Tamil Nadu Registration Service and they were appointed as such in G.O.Ms.No.769/89, dated 4.10.1989. THE above said G.O. reads that they were appointed to act regularly as District Registrars by direct recruitment. Paragraph 11 of the said G.O. says that orders regarding the fixation of inter se seniority of the District Registrars appointed by the transfer from the post of Sub Register Grade I and the District Registrars appointed by direct recruitment will be issued in due course. THEreafter, the Inspector General of Registration notified in seniority list of promotee District Registrars in annexure 4 and directly recruited District Registrars in annexure 5 of his Proceedings dated 28.1.1995.

(2.) REPRESENTATIONS were made by Mr.K. Madalaimuthu in his letter dated 20.9.1992 and by Mr.A. Arumuga Nainar in his letter dated 19.5.1993 to fix their inter se seniority in the year 1986 since estimate of vacancies for the post of District Registrars for the year 1985 was issued in G.O.Ms.No.147, dated 10.2.1986 by fixing 6 vacancies to be filled by the Sub Registrars Grade I on promotion and 3 vacancies by Direct Recruitment. The Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowment Department, Tamil Nadu by his letter dated 7.11.1994 rejected their request stating that according to Rule 2(1) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules, a person is said to be appointed to a service only if the discharges for the first time, the duties of the post borne on the cadre of such service and common probation or training prescribed for members thereof and inter se seniority in the post of District Registrars, where there is more than one method of recruitment would have to be fixed under Rule 35(aa) of the tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules read with Rule 2(1), meaning thereby their seniority cannot be fixed in the year 1986 as they had not entered service at that point of time. Subsequently, the names of Thiru A.Arumuga Nainar and Thiru K.Madalaimuthu, who are the petitioners herein were included in the seniority list issued on 28.1.1995 in Sl.Nos.39(A) and 39(b) respectively below Thiru M.Krishnamoorthy and above Thiru K.Durairajan, who were promotee District Registrars. This proceedings of the Inspector General of Registration was dated 16.11.1995. In meantime, Mr.K. Madalaimuthu filed O.A.No.779 of 1995 for fixation of his inter se seniority and later amended the later to quash the proceedings of the Inspector General of registration dated 28.1.1995 as modified by proceedings dated 16.11.1995 and to direct the respondents to prepare inter se seniority list in the cadre of District Registrars with reference to the permanent posts and regular selection thereon as per the Special Rules and give further promotion to the post of Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Deputy Inspector General of Registration and additional Inspector General of Registration. The very same petitioner also filed O.A. No.1067 of 1995 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras seeking for a direction to respondents to comply with the mandatory Rule 39(c) of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1955 and consequently directing the first respondent, Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Religious Endowment department, Chennai to promote him as Additional Inspector General of Registration with all consequential benefits on basis of his seniority. Similarly, the petitioner in W.P. No.1549 of 1999 Mr.A. Arumuga Nainar filed O.A. No.1068 of 1995 for the same relief. The Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal had a common order dismissing all the three original indications together with O.A. Nos.7429 of 1996 and 1181 of 1997.

(3.) THE Government by G.O.Ms.No.147, dated 10.2.1986 fixed the estimate of vacancies for the post of District Registrars for the year 1985 by recruitment by transfer and by direct recruitment as 16 and 3 respectively. THEreafter, by G.O.Ms.No.957, dated 23.9.1986 after examining the proposal of Inspector General of Registration and pending finalisation of the regular list of District Registrar of 1985 in consultation with the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission prepared a temporary list of 16 officers fit for appointment by transfer to the post of District Registrar in the Tamil Nadu Registration Service for the year 1985. Prior to the above panel, the Government by G.O.Ms.No.796, dated 13.7.1981 had directed to include 34 officers named therein in the list of officers fit for appointment by transfer to the post of District Registrar for the year 1981. In so far as these 34 officers are concerned, the Government after considering the proposal of Inspector General of Registration and the remarks of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, passed Orders in G.O.Ms.No.534, dated 28.5.1987 regularizing their service. With regard to the panel of officers prepared by G.O.Ms.No.957, dated 23.9.1986 their services were regularised by the Government on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee in G.O.Ms.No.162, dated 16.6.1995. This panel was for the year 1985-86. Similarly by G.O.Ms. Nos.163, 164 and 165, dated 16.6.1995, the Government, on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee regularised the panel of officers for appointment by transfer to the post of District Registrars for the years 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89.