K SOUNDARAPANDIAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W. P. No. 43975 of 2002 has been filed challenging the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O. A. No. 4385/1998 dated 3. 9. 2002. W. P. Nos. 26131 of 2004 and 29445 of 2003 are also against the common order passed by the Tribunal dated 3. 9. 2002 allowing O. A. No. 7217/2001. The parties shall be referred to in the rank as they are arrayed in W. P. No. 26131/2004.

(2.) THE facts leading to the case are:

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the order of the Tribunal, so far as it relates to directing the official respondents to count the seniority of erstwhile Cinchona Department staff with effect from 1. 4. 90, for fixing the inter-se seniority in the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest, is contrary to the rules and prima facie, illegal. That apart, according to the learned counsel, as far as the 1st respondent is concerned, he was originally appointed in the Cinchona Department and subsequently, on winding up of the said Department, he was sent to TANTEA. Basing on the orders of the Tribunal, he was repatriated to the Forest Department by G. O. Ms. No. 275 dated 6. 11. 96. As per this Government Order only, he was absorbed in the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forest. According to the learned counsel, he was appointed in the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest by order dated 10. 6. 97 in G. O. Rt. No. 566 Environment and Forests (FR. I) Department. As such, his joining in the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest is subsequent to the petitioner herein. That apart, as far as the Forest Department is concerned, specifically, for the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest, as per rule 8 (b) of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Forest Service, seniority shall be determined only from the date on which the Assistant Conservators of Forest, whether recruited directly or by transfer, begin to draw, for the first time, the time scale of pay sanctioned for the post. (Further, as per the Special Rules, only after the completion of training alone, one is eligible for seniority ). As far as the 1st respondent is concerned, he has drawn the pay fixed for the post of Assistant Conservator of Forest only in July, 1997 whereas the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Conservator of Forest with effect from 25. 4. 1997 and he has drawn the pay fixed for the post on 1. 5. 1997. As such, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, as per the rules, the 1st respondent cannot be senior to him.