V KUPPAN Vs. P MURALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.A.No.255 of 2005 is filed by the respondents 3 to 5 in W.P.No.13723 of 1997 against the order dated 24.9.2004 allowing the writ petition. Some of the similarly placed persons as that of the respondents 3 to 5 in W.P.No.13723 of 1997, after obtaining leave of the Court to file appeal in WAMP.No.422 of 2005, filed W.A.No.651 of 2005.

(2.) THE parties herein will be described according to their ranks in the writ petition.

(3.) RESPONDENTS 3 to 5 filed counter affidavit and stated that as per the above quoted rule, viz., Rule 4, fifteen years of total service in the Corporation is essential and the service need not be in the cadre of Junior Engineer alone. As per the said rule only, the Corporation empaneled the respondents 3 to 5 in the promotion list and the petitioners cannot challenge the said empanelment in this writ petition as they are coming under different stream viz., Degree Holders with five years of service in the post of Assistant Engineers. It is also contended in the counter affidavit that 3:1 ratio for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer (Electrical) with Degree and Diploma Holders cannot be pressed into service at the instance of the petitioners as the petitioners 1, 2 and 3 filed W.P.Nos.6057, 6058 and 6059 of 1990 and raised the very same issue and sought for fixing the ratio of 5:1 in the matters of promotion of Degree and Diploma Holders. The said writ petitions were dismissed by this Court by a common order dated 21.3.1991 along with other batch of cases. In the said judgment it is held that the ratio of 3:1 is not applicable to Electrical Department of Chennai Corporation. The rule also nowhere prescribes any ratio in respect of promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer (Electrical). The rule making authorities having omitted to include the said ratio, the petitioners cannot seek for direction to amend the rule and as per rules, a Diploma Holder in Electrical Engineering would be eligible to be promoted as Assistant Divisional Engineer, if he has put in minimum period of 15 years of service and insofar as the Degree Holders are concerned, they must possess not less than five years of service as Assistant Engineers in the Corporation Engineering Subordinate Service. Pointing out all these things, the respondents 3 to 5 contend that Rule 4 is strictly followed and the petitioners have no right to challenge the said order giving promotion to respondents 3 to 5.