M ELANGOVAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue involved in these Writ Petitions is identical in nature, they have been taken up together and disposed of vide this common order.

(2.) For the sake of brevity, the facts of the case are being taken from W.P.No.10437 of 2015. ii) The petitioner passed the aforesaid Departmental Tests, his probation has been declared on 31.05.2000. Subsequently, the petitioner got promoted to the post of Assistant joined duty on 06.09.2001. The case of the petitioner is that, the next avenue of promotion is to the post of Deputy Block Development Officer. Since the official respondents, without reference to the seniority in the feeder category as well as the date of joining the promotional post, viz., Assistant, fixed the seniority by mode of Adoption Date, the petitioner's name has been placed much below his juniors, owing to which, the petitioner has got promotion to the post of Deputy Block Development Officer belatedly in the year 2010-11. According to the petitioner, due to such wrong fixation of seniority, he has been deprived of his service benefits. iii) The petitioner states that, one S.Yuvaraj, who was placed similarly like the petitioner, filed a Writ Petition, in W.P.No.14595 of 2009, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mamus, to quash the order passed by the second respondent/Director of Rural Development Panchayat, (as by the said impugned order, the petitioner's request to place him above his juniors, viz., E.Venkatachalam C.Swamiinathan was rejected) for a consequential direction to fix his seniority in the cadre of Assistant, by taking into account his date of promotion as Assistant confer all consequential service monetary benefits. This Court, by order, dated 30.04.2010, allowed the Writ Petition, quashed the the impugned order, directed the officials respondents to fix the seniority of the petitioner in the cadre of Assistant, by taking into account his date of promotion as Assistant confer all consequential service monetary benefits. When the matter on appeal before the Hon'ble Division Bench, being W.A.No.2132 of 2011, the Hon'ble Division Bench by judgement, dated 13.02.2013, confirmed the orders passed in the Writ Petition. The third respondent, in pursuance of the order passed in W.P.No.14595 of 2009, issued a proceedings, dated 15.04.2013, revising the seniority of S.Yuvaraj by placing him at the appropriate place in the cadre of Assistant. The petitioner states that, while implementing the order passed in W.P.No.14595 of 2009, the official respondents ought to have taken into consideration the case of other similarly placed persons, who have been deprived of their service benefits due to such wrong fixation of seniority. iv) Therefore, the petitioner six other aggrieved persons (viz., the petitioners in other Writ Petitions) submitted a joint representation, dated 18.03.2014, clearly setting out their case sought for rectification of seniority list, in the light of the orders passed in W.P.No.14595 of 2009. Since the said representation evoked no response, they filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.31359 of 2014, praying for issuance of a writ of mamus to direct the official respondents to accord seniority in the cadre of Assistant by taking into account of the date of their joining the post as Assistant in the light of the order passed in W.P.No.14595 of 2009. This Court, by order, dated 01.12.2014, disposed of W.P.No.31359 of 2014, by directing the official respondents to consider the said representation, dated 18.03.2014, to pass appropriate orders. Pursuant to the order passed in W.P.No.31359 of 2014, the second respondent passed an order, dated 24.03.2015, rejecting the request of the petitioners, stating that, for fixation of seniority in the cadre of Assistant, the date of passing the departmental test has to be taken into consideration. It is further stated in the impugned order that, in the Writ Petition filed by S.Yuvaraj, in W.P.No.14595 of 2009, there was a positive direction issued in his favour, to fix his seniority in the cadre of Assistant by taking into account of his date of promotion as Assistant to confer all consequential service monetary benefits, in compliance of the said direction, his seniority has been revised, whereas, in the order passed in W.P.No.31359 of 2014, there was only a direction to consider the claim of the petitioner therefore, two judgments are different in nature, therefore, the request of the petitioners cannot be considered.

(3.) Challenging the aforesaid order, dated 24.03.2015, the present Writ Petitions are filed.