S GOVINDARAJU Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(2.) IT is stated that the petitioner had joined the service of the Revenue Department as a Surveyor-cum-Draftsmen on consolidated pay in the year 1983. The petitioner had been appointed in Sivagangai District Survey Unit pursuant to his selection in the year 1983. In the seniority list of Surveyors/Draftsmen in Sivagangai, dated 29.3.89, the petitioner was placed at Serial No.357. On 31.12.91, the petitioner was granted time scale of pay on the basis of seniority, vide order bearing No.Na.Ka.A1/23984/91-(1). On 30.9.94, the petitioner was transferred to Pudukkottai on mutual transfer in the place of K.R.Sasikala and the petitioner had assumed charge at Pudukkottai on 19.10.94. Thereafter, on 16.8.95, the third respondent had issued an order bearing No.Na.Ka.A1/7296/95, containing the revised seniority list of Surveyors/Draftsmen in Pudukkottai. No notice had been given to the petitioner with regard to the revision of the seniority list. Thereafter, the third respondent had issued the final seniority list on Surveyors/Draftsmen in Pudukkottai bearing No.Na.Ka.A1/7296/95, on 20.12.95. The name of the petitioner did not find a place in the said list. Based on the seniority list, dated 20.12.95, reversion orders were issued to 43 Surveyors/Draftsmen, vide the order of the third respondent bearing No.Na.Ka.A1/7296/95, dated 11.1.96. Vide the order bearing No.Na.Ka.A1/7296/95, dated 20.4.96, the petitioner had been reverted to the post of Surveyor, on consolidated pay, on the basis of the revised seniority list, dated 20.12.95. No notice was issued to the petitioner before the order of reversion had been passed. The petitioner was not given an opportunity to put forth his case before the order, dated 20.4.96, was issued. In such circumstances, the petitioner had filed an original application before the Tamilnadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.5100 of 1996, which has been transferred to this Court and re-numbered as W.P.No.27663 of 2006.

(3.) THE learned counsel had prayed that this Court may be pleased to pass a similar order in the present writ petition, as the facts and circumstances are similar in nature as those found in the above mentioned cases.