BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated : 08/07/2011
Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA
Writ Petition No.2285 of 2006
P. Mahadevan,
S/o. Late Periyasamy,
Record Clerk,
Office of the Assistant Elementary
Educational Officer,
Rajapalayam. .... Petitioner
Vs
1. The District Educational Officer (Secondary),
Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.
2. The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.
3. S. Kumar,
Junior Assistant,
P.T.M.Girls Higher Secondary School,
Virudhunagar.
4. P. Murugesan,
Record Clerk,
Government Higher Secondary School,
Thiruthangal. ..... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the
first respondent herein in Na.Ka.No.6855/A1/03 dated 25.01.2005 and quash the
same and consequently directing the respondents herein to re-fix the seniority
of the petitioner in the seniority list dated 25.01.2005, placing the petitioner
at Serial No.3 over and above the respondents 3 and 4 as per the proceedings of
the first respondent dated 13.06.2001 and with all attendant benefits.
!For Petitioner ... Mr.V.Ramajegadeesan
^For Respondents ... Ms.S.Bharathi for R-1 and R-2
Government Advocate
Mr.T.Srinivasaraghavan for R-3
No appearance for R-4
- - - - - - - -
:ORDER
The petitioner has invoked the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this
Court, praying for a Writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the promotion
panel dated 25.01.2005.
2. The case set up by the petitioner is, that he was appointed on
compassionate ground as Record Clerk on 03.02.1992. In pursuance of his
appointment, he joined service on 07.02.1992, and vide order dated 17.02.1993,
he was regularized.
3. The petitioner, on completion of his probation on 06.02.1994, was
confirmed.
4. The Provisional Seniority list was circulated by the Department,
wherein the name of the petitioner was shown at S.No.4.
5. It is the case of the petitioner, that though Provisional
Seniority list was circulated in 2001, in 2005, the petitioner has been shown
Junior to respondent Nos.3 and 4.
6. The petitioner had challenged the seniority of Respondent Nos.3
and 4, by claiming, that they were wrongly placed above him, as the respondent
Nos.3 and 4 were appointed on compassionate ground as Watchman and Office
Assistant, and promoted as Lab Assistants on 10.02.1992 and 12.02.1992
respectively i.e., after the petitioner has joined the post as Record Clerk. The
petitioner, therefore, claims to be senior to respondent Nos.3 and 4.
7. The writ petition is opposed by the learned Government Advocate,
by contending, that this petition is misconceived. The impugned order challenged
by the petitioner is not an order of seniority, but, in fact, is a panel
prepared for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant.
8. It is the stand of the learned Government Advocate, that for
promotion to the post of Junior Assistant, there are four feeder categories
viz., Lab Assistant, Record Clerk, Office Assistant and Watchman, and the list
claimed by the petitioner to be the seniority list is, in fact, a penal for
promotion.
9. It is neither pleaded nor the petitioner has been able to show,
as to how the preparation of panel, was bad or violated any Rule or Regulation.
The writ is, filed on the wrong presumption, that there is change in seniority.
10. No case is made out to challenge the panel for the purpose of
promotion.
11. Consequently, this writ petition is dismissed.
No costs.
Dpn/-
To
1. The District Educational Officer (Secondary),
Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.
2. The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Virudhunagar, Virudhunagar District.
