High Court Madras High Court

K. Paramanandam vs C. Shanmugasundaram on 22 April, 2008

Madras High Court
K. Paramanandam vs C. Shanmugasundaram on 22 April, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated :   22..4..2008

Coram:

The Honourable Mr.Justice P.K. MISRA
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice K.CHANDRU

W. P. No. 1039 of 2005
and
W.P.M.P. No. 1153 of 2005

K. Paramanandam						... Petitioner

			-vs-

1.	C. Shanmugasundaram

2.	Union of India
	Rep. by Superintendent of Post Offices
	Karur Division
	Karur

3.	Assistant  Superintendent of Post Offices
	Karur Sub Division
	Karur
	
4.	The Registrar 
	Central Administrative Tribunal 
	Chennai 					 	... Respondents
	
	Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorari calling for the records from the files of the Tribunal in order dated 15.12.2004 passed in O.A. No. 151 of 2004 and quash the same.

	For Petitioner	 	: Mr. K.M. Ramesh
	For Respondent 1 	: Mr. N. Chandaraj
	For Respondents 2&3 : Mr. B. Ullasavelan

ORDER

K. CHANDRU, J.

Heard the arguments of Mr. K.M. Ramesh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. N. Chandharaj, learned counsel for the first respondent and Mr. B. Ullasavelan, learned counsel for the respondents 2 and 3 and have perused the records.

2. The writ petition is filed by K. Paramanandam, who was the third respondent in O.A. No. 151 of 2004. The said Original Application was filed by the first respondent herein (C.Shanmugasundaram) seeking to quash the order of the second respondent Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, Karur Division dated 30.01.2004 and also to permit him as a Gramin Dak Sevak [GDS] Mail Deliverer [MD] in the same office. By the said order dated 30.01.2004, the second respondent transferred the said Shanmugasundaram as GDSMC, Vengamedu and the Paramanandam was directed to be posted as GDS MD, Vengamedu.

3. It was the stand of the first respondent that in the seniority list of GDS for the Karur Postal Division, his name appears as serial No.303A whereas the petitioner’s name appears as serial No.418. The petitioner joined the Department as ED staff only on 26.8.1985 whereas the first respondent joined on 27.01.1981. In that view of the matter, when the first respondent was senior, he chose the post of GDS MD and, therefore, his posting was in order. The second respondent cannot entertain a petition from the petitioner and demand that he should be posted as GDS MD.

4. The CAT heard the petitioner and the respondents and finally by its order dated 15.12.2004 held that the first respondent was working as GDS MD in Karur since 1997 without any interruption and after the work was transferred to Vengamedu on 29.10.2003, both the petitioner and the first respondent were working as GDS MD in Karur HO. That as per the instructions given by the official respondents, the senior GDS MD will have the option to remain as GDS MD and the junior post held by the petitioner should be redesignated as GDS MC. In that view of the matter, the CAT held that the senior person should have the option of choosing the post of GDS MD and allowed the Original Application. The Department had not preferred any writ petition and it is only the petitioner who has come forward to file the present writ petition.,

5. Mr. K.M. Ramesh, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the seniority list can only be confined to the Sub-Division or recruiting unit. He also stated that both the petitioner and the first respondent were originally in the cadre of GDS MD and the first respondent alone was some times working in other places and, therefore, took exception to the statement that he had an uninterrupted posting was wrong.

6. We are not persuaded to accept the said submission. We are of the view that the CAT relied upon the Departmental guidelines and as a matter of fact, found the first respondent was a senior and, therefore, he ought not to have been disturbed by the orders of the second respondent. We do not find any infirmity or illegality in the order of the CAT. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. The interim stay granted in W.P.M.P. No. 1153 of 2005 will stand vacated. The Official respondents shall implement the order of the CAT within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there will be no order as to costs.

							(P.K.M., J.)    (K.C., J.)
								  22..4..2008
Index	: Yes / No

Internet	: Yes / No

gri
									P.K. MISRA, J.  
and            
          						            	K. CHANDRU, J.     
											gri
To
1.	Superintendent of Post Offices
	Karur Division
	Karur

2.	Assistant  Superintendent of Post Offices
	Karur Sub Division
	Karur
	
3.	The Registrar 
	Central Administrative Tribunal 
	Chennai 



Pre-Delivery Order in
	             				  W. P. No. 1039 of 2005


Delivered on
  22..4..2008