IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 10.02.2010
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR
W.P.No.37998 of 2006
S. JAYACHANDRAN [ PETITIONER ]
Vs
1 THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER
TIRUPATTUR DIVISION.
2 THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
VELLORE CIRCLE VELLORE-632001.
3 M. KAMALNATHAN [RESPONDENTS ]
PRAYER: Original Application No.10747 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench to call for the records of the 1st respondent in connection with the order passed in SO No.409/98 dt. 16.12.98 and quash the same and direct the respondents to promote the Petitioner as Tamil Pundit (P.G. Asst. in Tamil) and grant him all consequential service and monetary benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition.
For Petitioner ... Mr.B.K.Srinivasan
for Mr.K.Venkataraman
For Respondents ... Mr.Sathish
Government Advocate (Forest)
O R D E R
Original Application No.10747 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench to call for the records of the first respondent in connection with the order passed in SO No.409/98 dt. 16-12-98 and quash the same and direct the respondents to promote the Petitioner as Tamil Pundit (P.G. Asst. in Tamil) and grant him all consequential service and monetary benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, O.A was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition.
2.The petitioner who is a Secondary Grade teacher in Forest Department Elementary School, challenges the order promoting the third respondent as Tamil Pandit and his appointment at Pudur Nadu Forest Higher Secondary School stating that he is senior to the third respondent and the third respondent is from different division viz., Thiruvannamalai division whereas the petitioner belongs to the Thiruppathur Division. At this premises, the impugned order is challenged.
3.A reply has been filed by the respondents denying the stand taken by the petitioner as above.
4.At the outset it is stated that the third respondent was senior in service and qualified for the post of Tamil Pandit before the petitioner. It is stated that the promotion of third respondent was based on the rules framed in G.O.Ms.No.328 Environment and Forest, PR II Department dated 30.12.1996. As far as the seniority is concerned based on the order of Tribunal in O.A.Nos.5553 of 1992 and 2788 of 1995, a revised seniority list was prepared in which the name of the third respondent was placed at Sl.No.3 and that of the petitioner was placed at Sl.No.16 and therefore by virtue of the seniority, the third respondent was promoted as Tamil Pandit.
5. The next contention raised by the petitioner is that the third respondent belongs to Thiruvannamalai division and not Thirupathur division and therefore he cannot be promoted as Tamil Pandit in Thirupathur division. The learned counsel for the respondent relied upon the order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.9387 of 1998 whereby the case of one K.Mani was considered and promoted as Post Graduate Assistant and consequently the third respondent Kamalanathan was reverted back and transferred to parent Division viz., Thirupathur Division.
6.In such view of the matter, both the contention raised by the petitioner that he is senior to the third respondent and that they are from two different regions are erroneous plea and without any basis and are rejected.
7. The respondents have acted on the basis of the Tribunal order while fixing seniority and transfer of the third respondent to Thirupathur Division. Respondent action cannot be found fault with.
8.In such view of the matter finding no merits the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.
cla
To
1 THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER
TIRUPATTUR DIVISION.
2 THE CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
VELLORE CIRCLE
VELLORE 632001