D PARAMESWARI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Petition No.18695 of 2006 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider the appeal dated 30.5.1990 preferred by the petitioner. Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE Writ Petition No.36723 of 2006 is directed against the impugned order of the second respondent dated 15.9.2006 under which the appeals made by the petitioner dated 8.2.2006, 13.3.2006 and 22.3.2006 have been rejected on the ground that the said appeals have been made belatedly. THE impugned order of rejection relates to the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintendent. However, in the affidavit filed by the petitioner it is her case that even in respect of the post of Assistant, when she had a grievance she has made an appeal to the Government on 30.5.1990. In the said representation the petitioner has stated that she was not given due promotion in the post of Assistant. It is also her grievance that in the seniority list of Junior Assistant-cum-Steno typist the petitioner was placed in Serial Number.2, while Janakiraman was placed in Serial Number 5. Further, the said Janakiraman in the cadre of Junior Assistant has been promoted above the petitioner on 19.1.1989. It was under these circumstances, the petitioner has made the appeal to the Government on 30.5.1990. THE case of the petitioner is that unless the appeal given by the petitioner to the Government against her super session in the post of Assistant in 1990 is decided, the impugned order which relates to the claim of the petitioner for the next post of Superintendent cannot be rejected only on the ground of delay.

(3.) IT is also seen that in the typed set of papers the representation of the petitioner dated 30.5.2006 has been filed which shall be taken into consideration by the first respondent while disposing of the appeal as stated above. Till the final order is passed by the Government in the representation as stated above, the impugned order of the second respondent dated 15.9.2006 shall be kept in abeyance.