J ALAMELUMANGAI Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT; DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION; N MURUGANANDAM; J RADHAKRISHNAN; R VIMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mrs.J.Alamelumangai, who was appointed as a Staff Nurse on 23.03.1990, by the Director of Medical Services and subsequently got promoted as Nursing Tutor Grade-II in February 2006, has filed this writ petition challenging G.O(D)No.341, Health and Family Welfare (AA2) Department, dated 26.02.2016, to quash the same, on the ground that instead of posting her as Lecturer in Medical Surgical Nursing in the vacancies at Madras Medical College, Chennai, she has been wrongly posted as Lecturer in Nursing in the Speciality of Psychiatric in Government Theni Medical College, Theni, only to accommodate the 3rd respondent as Lecturer in Medical Surgical Nursing at Madras Medical College, Chennai.

(2.) Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is senior to the 3rd respondent/N.Muruganandam from the date of appointment. She was appointed as a Staff Nurse on 23.03.1990, by the Director of Medical Services, on the basis of her Diploma qualification in Nursing and after her appointment, she studied B.Sc Nursing course in the college of Nursing, Madras Medical College, Chennai, during the period 2001-03, as a service candidate and that after completion of 16 years of service as a Staff Nurse, she was posted in the education side of the Medical Department on 08.02.2006 as Nursing Tutor Grade-II in the school of Nursing, Madurai. She has also completed her post graduation in M.Sc., Medical Surgical Nursing, which is a prescribed qualification for higher promotion as Lecturer in Medical Surgical Nursing as per the Indian Nursing Council norms.

(3.) He would further submit that after completion of her post graduation, the petitioner was posted in the college of Nursing in Madurai Medical College and has been working from July 2011 till date, thereby, she has completed six years of unblemished service. Considering her post graduation, length of service and seniority, she has been promoted by the 1st respondent, vide impugned G.O., as Lecturer in Nursing in the Nursing Colleges run by the Government and that the said promotion is based on seniority. The seniority of the petitioner is, '245' as per the finalisation of the seniority list, whereas, the 3rd respondent's seniority is, '274', which clearly shows that the petitioner is much senior to the 3rd respondent.