C.PUSHPAVALLI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the issue raised in the present batch of writ petitions is common, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The petitioners in W.P.No.29677 of 2012, working in Education Department, have challenged the impugned proceedings issued in Na.Ka.No.3264/A4/E3/2011 dated 7.9.2012 by the Joint Director of School Education (Personnel), to quash the same with a consequential direction to the respondents to re-fix their seniority in the cadre of Assistant, based on the combined inter-se seniority list in the cadre of Junior Assistant/Typist/Steno- Typist Grade III as per Rule 35(a) of Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules and consequently promote all the petitioners to the post of Assistant and Superintendent retrospectively with effect from the date on which juniors in the combined seniority list were promoted with all monetary and consequential service benefits.

(3.) Mr.G.Sankaran, learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners, leading the arguments, submitted that when the petitioners were appointed in the post of Steno Typist through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in various departments like Health, Agriculture, Education, Employment & Training etc., prior to 1.8.92, the post of Typist/Steno Typist stood identified as single category as Category 17 of the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules and the post of Junior Assistant/Typist/Steno Typist carried identical scale of pay and the next avenue of promotion is to the post of Assistant. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission also by a common recruitment filled up the post of Junior Assistant/Steno Typist/Typist and the posts belong to Group IV category. Moreover, a combined seniority was also maintained in the above three cadres for the promotional post of Assistant and further promotion to the post of Superintendent in the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service following the inter-se seniority list among the three cadres. However, during the year 1992, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.417, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 1.12.93 and G.O.Ms.No.256, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 1.8.92 imposing a ban for promotion to the post of Assistant from the category of Steno Typist with effect from 1.8.92. Resultantly, the Steno Typists were deprived of their promotion to the post of Assistant, whereas the other counter parts of the common category, namely, Junior Assistant/Typist were given promotion to the post of Assistant and Junior Employment Officer without any hindrance and number of juniors to the petitioners were also given promotion to the post of Assistant and Junior Employment Officer. Even prior to 1.8.92, there was a ratio of 4:1 to be maintained for promotion to the post of Assistant from the post of Junior Assistant and Typist/Steno Typist respectively. But after 1.8.92, in view of the ban imposed, the Steno Typist alone lost the opportunity for promotion. In view of the ban, the Steno Typist Association filed O.A.No.1705 of 1996. The said O.A., was transferred to this Court and re-numbered as W.P.No.6550 of 2006 consequent to the abolition of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and this Court, by order dated 4.11.2006 passed an order directing the respondent to have a fresh look on the issue of providing promotional avenue for Stenographers on the basis of the observations made therein. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, the State Government issued G.O.Ms.No.34, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 21.2.2001 lifting the ban imposed against the Steno Typist Grade III to enable them to get promotion to the post of Assistant by transfer, since the scale of pay for the post of Steno Typist Grade III and Assistant are identical. Thereafter, G.O.Ms.No.121, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 18.5.2007 was issued providing promotional avenue for the Steno Typist Grade I and Grade II to the post of Superintendent.