TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. C SELVARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ appeal is at the instance of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as "the TNEB") questioning the order of the learned Judge made in W.P.No.9315 of 1996 dated 17.2.2004.

(2.) THE appeal arises on the following facts. THE first respondent joined the services of the TNEB in the year 1971 and he belonged to RWE category. He was promoted to the post of Technical Assistant Grade-I in the year 1982. THE next avenue of promotion is to the post of Junior Engineer Grade-II and further to the post of Junior Engineer Grade-I. When the panel for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer Grade-II was drawn on 24.12.86, the first respondent was not included in the said panel apparently an enquiry was pending against him on that date. Though the enquiry was pending, he was issued with an order dated 27.5.86 imposing punishment of stoppage of increment, which would take effect from 1.4.87. He also suffered a similar punishment of stoppage of increment by a subsequent order dated 29.12.87. THEreafter, by order dated 30.1.88, he was removed from service. It appears that the first respondent did not question both the orders dated 27.5.86 and 29.12.87 imposing the punishment of stoppage of increments and those orders of punishment have become final. However, he questioned the order of removal by filing W.P.No.13192 of 1988 and the said order was set aside by this Court vide order dated 5.10.93. Pursuant to the order in the writ petition, he was reinstated into service on 10.12.93. As he was reinstated into service, he made a representation to the TNEB that his name should be considered for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer Grade-II and thereafter to Junior Engineer Grade-I. His request was considered, but the promotion was given as Junior Engineer Grade-II only with effect from 1.9.94. THErefore, he approached this Court by way of the writ petition seeking for a direction to the TNEB for promotion. By the order under appeal, the learned single Judge did not agree with the contention of the first respondent as to the promotion to the post of Junior Engineer Grade-I on the ground that for the said post, the first respondent should have passed the required test and as such he has not passed such a test. However, so far as the claim for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer Grade-II is concerned, the learned Judge found that on the date when the seniority list was drawn i.e., on 24.12.86, there was no punishment imposed on the first respondent since the punishment of stoppage of increment was given effect to from 1.4.87. THErefore the learned Judge found that there cannot be any impediment for the TNEB to promote the first respondent to the post of Junior Engineer Grade-II by including his name in the panel for promotion drawn on 24.12.86. THE above order is put in issue in this writ appeal.

(3.) ON the other hand, Mr.G.Venkatraman, learned counsel for the first respondent would submit that the promotions in the TNEB are not effected following merit-cum-ability, particularly Regulation 98 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Service Regulations, and it has been the practice in the TNEB to effect promotions only in terms of Regulation 106 of the above Regulations. When promotions are effected under Regulation 106, such promotions are effected only on the basis of seniority without reference to the merit and ability. Therefore, the non-inclusion of the name of the first respondent in the panel drawn on 24.12.86 on the basis that an enquiry was pending is totally unsustainable. Further, the learned counsel would submit that on that date, the first respondent did not suffer any punishment and therefore the TNEB should have included his name in the said panel. Having regard to the above facts, the learned Judge has correctly appreciated the issue and had directed the promotion of the first respondent as Junior Engineer Grade-II with effect from the date when his junior was promoted.