D LEELAVATHY Vs. DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION KILPAUK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the same person in both the Writ Petitions. In the first Writ Petition, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 12.11.2005 issued by the Director of Medical and Rural Health Services, namely the 2nd respondent. THE impugned list challenged in the Writ Petition is a proposed panel of Staff Nurses for promotion and appointment to the post of Nursing Superintendent for the panel year 2006-2007 under the Tamil Nadu Medical Subordinate Services. In the order, in the penultimate paragraph, the Director requested the Subordinate Officers to circulate the Annexure to all the Staff Nurses working under their control and objection if any with regard to this seniority, alteration and inclusions received from them should be forwarded and the particulars furnished by the individuals will not confer any rights for inclusion in the panel and the panel will be restricted to the number of vacancies that will be made available. It was claimed that the number of vacancies for the year was identified as 285.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that she has sent a representation dated 20.3.2006 stating that her serial number in the seniority list and the details were not furnished to her and therefore she requested copies of the seniority list for the years 1977,1978 and 1996. Subsequently she sent a further representation dated 27.3.2006 stating that her name could not be included in the panel and she finds place the names of Veerasamy Seethalakshmi, Damadaran Parvathi, Nagarathinam Lakshmi, Perumal Nayakar Parvadavardini, Akbar Alikhaan Shamlari, Kinedilda Tekshira, who are all juniors to her, in the list. IT is at this stage, she has moved this Court challenging the provisional list of Staff Nurses included in the panel subject to their eligibility.

(3.) DURING the pendency of that Writ Petition, the same petitioner has filed the second Writ Petition, namely W.P.No.18308 of 2009. Initially, the prayer of the petitioner was for a direction to include her name in the panel drawn vide proceedings dated 29.7.2006. In fact, this order came to be issued after the interim direction was issued by this Court by an order dated 24.7.2006. It was also stated that it was subject to the outcome of the Writ Petition in W.P.No.11962 of 2006 filed by the petitioner. When that is the position, there is no necessity to file the second Writ Petition. But, notwithstanding the same, the petitioner has challenged the panel for the post of Nursing Superintendent Grade III issued for the year 2006-2007.