G. DHANASEKARAN Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records of the first respondent-Inspector General of Registration in the proceedings in Lr. No. 11161/A2/2015, dated 10.12.2015 and quash the same and direct the first respondent to restore the seniority of the petitioner according to the rank fixed by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in the directly recruited post of Sub-Registrar Grade-II and to include the name of the petitioner in the temporary panel of Sub-Registrar Grade-I for the year 2011-12 over and above the third respondent, with consequential service benefits including further promotion.

(2.) The brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the Writ Petition, are as follows:

(3.) When the Writ Petition is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even during the extended period of probation, the petitioner is a probationer and he is entitled to temporary promotion as Sub-Registrar Grade-I under Rule 23(e) read with 39(a)(i) of the General Rules under the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules. In this connection, learned counsel made detailed arguments by inviting the attention of this Court to the above said Rule 23(e) read with 39(a)(i). It is further contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that non-passing of the Telugu language test within the prescribed period of probation, but passing the Telugu language test within the extended period of probation on 27.08.2013, does not involve penalty in the service law. In this regard, he made detailed submissions by inviting the attention of this Court to Rule 28, para 4 of the said General Rules. Thus, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner should have been temporarily promoted as Sub-Registrar Grade-I with reference to the said Rule 23(e) read with Rule 39(a) relating to temporary promotion.