T N GOMATHINAYAGAM Vs. D DAYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WA No. 506/91 is by the 3rd respondent in WP 3105/86 and against the order dt. March 21, 1991 in the said writ petition allowing the same. The said writ petition is by one D. Dayal, possessing Engineering Degree qualification and working in the Madras Corporation, the 2nd respondent in the said writ petition and 3rd respondent herein. The 1st respondent in the said writ petition, who is the 2nd respondent in this appeal, is the State of Tamilnadu. The writ petitioner is the 1st respondent in this appeal. The 3rd respondent-appellant is a Diploma Holder in the service of the said Corporation.

(2.) THE question in the writ petition relates to the promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer (who was earlier called Assistant Engineer) other than Assistant Engineer (Electrical) in the said Corporation Engineering Service. As per Rule 4 of the relevant rules, viz. , Madras Corporation Engineering Service Rules, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') framed by the State Government, in exercise of its powers conferred by Section 86 (1) and Section 347 (2) (a) of the Madras City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919, eligibility to the aforesaid post of Asst. Engineer, other than Assistant Engineer (Electrical), is B. E. Degree and service as Asst Engineer (Supervisor) in the Corporation Engineering Subordinate service, Municipal Engineer Grade III, Junior Engineer or Supervisor (Public Health) for a period of not less than 5 years on duty. However, if the person to be promoted is an Engineering Diploma Holder in Engineering (and not an Engineering Degree Holder as above stated), Clause (i) (d) of the abovesaid Rule relating to promotion to Category 3 post, viz. , the post of Asst. Engineer, other than Assistant Engineer (Electrical), provides the service qualification as follows :-

(3.) BUT the only controversy in W. P. No. 3105 of 1986 is whether the abovesaid ten years service would include even the period of service rendered in the above said lower category posts and not merely the period of service rendered in the feeder category posts. As stated above, the abovesaid Rule contained in the above said proviso, while prescribing qualification for eligibility for the abovesaid Promotion, says that the said Diploma Holders must have put in "a total service of not less than 10 years in one or more categories". The whole question in this writ petition, only relates to the interpretation of the abovesaid term "one or more categories," that is, whether the said term means only the abovesaid feeder category post of Junior Engineer (Supervisor) or Head Surveyor or Head Draftsman or would also include lower category post, viz. , Overseer, Surveyor or Draftsman. In this connection the 2nd respondent State has issued the impugned memorandum dated August 14, 1978, inter alia interpreting in paragraph (2) point 11 of the abovesaid memorandum, the abovesaid term "one or more categories" as to include even the lower category posts of Overseers, Surveyors or Draftsmen (and not simply Junior Engineers (Supervisors) Head Surveyors or Head Draftsmen ). Aggrieved by the said interpretation in the said memorandum, the writ petitioner has filed the abovesaid writ petition (1) to quash the abovesaid portion of the memorandum, viz. , the abovesaid paragraph 2 point (11) thereof, on the ground that the abovesaid term would mean only the service rendered in the abovesaid feeder category of the Junior Engineer (Supervisor), Head surveyor or Head Draftsman and not the lower category post of Overseer, Surveyor or Draftsman and (2) to direct the respondents-State and the Corporation accordingly to take into account for the purpose of computing the qualifying service and seniority etc. , only of the abovesaid feeder category posts for the purpose of promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer.