S NATARAJAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. N. Sivam for V. Sankaranarayanan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Geetha Thamaraiselvan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondents.

(2.) THE writ petitioner has died subsequently to the filing of the writ petition and his wife has been added as his legal representative. The original writ petitioner has challenged the order of dismissal dated 18. 4. 2002 in T. A. No. 545 of 1992 of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal rejecting his claim to give deemed promotion to the petitioner as Additional Superintendent of Police on the day when his juniors were promoted and revise his pay and allowances on such basis.

(3.) THE Tribunal while dismissing the application took note of the fact that in the order passed earlier in W. P. No. 1519 of 1977 when the order of compulsory retirement made by G. O. Ms. No. 1846 Home Department dated 29. 7. 1976 during the period of emergency was quashed and since at that time, the petitioner had already reached the age of superannuation, this Court had observed that he shall be treated as reinstated into service and retired on attaining the age of superannuation and the consequential relief was to be granted to the petitioner in the form of grant of backwages for the period of unemployment. The Tribunal while dismissing the petition observed that it would not be possible to presume that the petitioner would have been promoted and hence the difference in amounts between the post actually occupied by him and the post to which he could have been promoted and increase of retiral benefits worked on such basis could not be given.