M.Meenakshi Sundaram v. The Secretary To Government

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 23.8 .2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM W.A.No.1770 of 2018 and C.M.P.No.14209 of 2018 M.Meenakshi Sundaram : Appellant

Versus

The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department, Secretary, Fort. St. George, Chennai 600 009.

: Respondent Prayer: Writ Appeal filed filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 22.4.2016 passed in W.P.No.14847 of 2016 on the file of this court.

Prayer in W.P.No.14847 of 2016:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus Directing the respondent to grant him promotion to the Post of Executive Officer, Special Grade on par with his junior K.Bhojan with all attendant and consequential benefits including revised pension and other terminal benefits in light of the Appeal preferred by the petitioner on 15.8.2013 followed by reminders on 9.3.2014 17.9.2014 2.5.2015 and 20.02.2016 For appellant : Ms.Dakshayani Reddy for Mr.GSankaran For respondent : Mr.R.Govindasamy, Special Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the court was made by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and

Mr.R.Govindasamy, learned Special Government Pleader, who takes notice on behalf of the respondent.

2. The writ appeal has been filed by the writ petitioner challenging the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition which claimed for a direction to the respondent to grant promotion to the appellant/writ petitioner to the post of Executive Officer Special Grade on par with his junior K.Bhojan with all attendant and consequential benefits including revised pension and other terminal benefits in the light of the appeal preferred by the appellant/writ petitioner on 15.8.2013 followed by reminder on 9.3.2014, 2.5.2015 and 20.2.2016.

3. The case of the appellant/writ petitioner is that he joined the post of Junior Assistant in the year 1976 and subsequently, he was promoted to the posts of Executive Officer, Grade II in the year 1992, Executive Officer Grade I on 13.12.1995, Executive Officer Selection Grade in the year 1999 and retired in the same post on 31.1.2006, however, his junior K.Bhojan was promoted as Executive Officer, Special Grade on 20.6.2005 and it came to light when the State Wide Seniority list was published on 12.7.2013.

As such, he filed representation by way of Appeal Petition on 15.8.2013 and thereafter, he filed the writ petition.

4. The learned Single Judge, having observed that the appellant/writ petitioner had admitted in para 5 of the affidavit that when he retired from service on 31.1.2006 from the post of Executive Officer, Selection Grade, his junior Mr.Bhojan was holding the post of Executive Officer, Special Grade, as he was also promoted to the said post as early as on 20.6.2005 and therefore, when the appellant/writ petitioner had not questioned the placement of his junior K.Bhojan at the time of his retirement on 31.1.2006, merely for the reason that he came to know of the proceedings dated 12.7.2013, he cannot be entitled to come to the court after three years seeking for the relief and dismissed the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches.

5. Be that as it may, now, what is pertinent to note is that a litigation by way of Appeal Petition before the respondent was pending consideration in respect of fixation of inter se seniority, and it appears that the writ petition was filed seeking only a mandamus to consider the appeal pending before the respondent, however, the same has been dismissed on the

ground of delay and laches. In the fact situation, we are of the view that it is suffice to direct the respondent herein to consider the appeal petition pending before him, without being influenced by the order of dismissal of the writ petition on the ground of delay and laches, so that the grievance of the appellant/writ petitioner would be considered in accordance with law as to the legitimate entitlement or otherwise.

6. Therefore, in modification of the order passed by the learned single Judge, we direct the respondent herein to entertain the appeal pending before him and dispose of the same in accordance with law after affording opportunity to the appellant and other contestants. The writ appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS V) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar ssk.

To:

The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department, Secretary, Fort. St. George, Chennai 600 009.

+1 cc to M/s.G.Sankaran, Advocate SR.No.57776 W.A.No.1770 of 2018 RR(CO) CSL/26.11.2018