V MALATHI Vs. M JAYAPRAKASH RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.S.Ramasamy Rajarajan, learned Counsel on behalf of the Appellants and Mr.N.G.R.Prasad for Respondents No. 1 to 5, Mrs.A.Srijayanthi, Special Government Pleader for Respondents No. 6 to 9, A.Abdul Asees for Respondents for 10 to 17, P.Kannan Kumar for Respondents No. 18 to 21.

(2.) The present Writ Appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.34078 of 2012 dated 25.04.2013 whereby which the learned Single Judge has allowed the Writ Petition filed by the Writ Petitioners who are the first to fifth Respondents in the instant Appeal. The factual matrix leading to the present controversy is that the Writ Petition No. 34078 of 2012 was filed by the Respondents No. 1 to 5 in the instant Appeal challenging the proceedings of the 8th Respondent on the instant Appeal releasing the panel for promotion to the post of Superintendent/Office Manager in the department of employment and training wherein which the names of the Appellants and other persons have been placed above the Writ Petitioners/ Respondents 1 to 5 overlooking the settled seniority list dated 25.05.2000. The case of the Writ Petitioners before the learned Single Judge is that they were appointed as Junior Assistant in the department of Employment and Training and so were the Appellants appointed in the said post. It has also been submitted that the first and second Writ Petitioners were subsequently promoted as Accountants/store keepers on a regular basis before the Respondents 5 to 15 were promoted as Assistants and Petitioners 3 to 5 were promoted as Accountant/Store Keeper before Respondents 13 to 15 were promoted as Assistants.

(3.) In the Affidavit that was filed in support of the Writ Petition, the hierarchy of the cadre of post was mentioned and it could be seen that the entry level post is Junior Assistant/ Typist after which they would be promoted as Assistant/Accountant/Store Keeper and then to the post of Superintendent/ Office Manager, then subsequently to the post of Administrative Officer after which they would be considered to the post of Deputy Director (Administration). It was contended that at the instance of one Ms.R.Amutha (3rd Appellant herein), who has filed W.P.No.4271 of 2012 before this Court claiming that the date of entry to the post of Junior Assistant must be taken into consideration for promotion to the post of Superintendent/ Office Manager and not the date of promotion to post of Assistant/Accountant/Store Keeper. In the promotion panel prepared for the year 2000 and 2006, the names of the Writ Petitioners have been placed above the private Respondents. But however, the tentative panel dated 23.11.2012 which has been assailed in the Writ Petition, the names of the Private Respondents have been placed above the Writ Petitioners in gross contravention to the seniority list of the year 2000 and 2006. It has been contended that the Petitioners were shown as seniors in the inter se seniority list dated 25.05.2000 and 18.09.2006 since they were promoted as Accountant/Store Keeper well before the private Respondents and the sudden change of the settled seniority in the impugned seniority list squarely illegal and in violation of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It has been submitted that the private Respondents in the Writ Petition have declined to accept the post of Accountant/ Store Keeper because it was very arduous and have also given letters relinquishing their claims for such promotion and seniority. Thus the sum and substance of the Writ Petition filed was that the seniority list that was already published in the year 2000 and 2006 cannot all of a sudden be altered in 2011-12 and consequently, it was prayed to restore the settled seniority of the year 2000 and 2006.