Association Of Tamilnadu v. The Government Of Tamil Nadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20-08-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. VINOD KUMAR WP No. 12826 of 2019 & WMP.Nos.13027 and 13028 of 2019
1. Association of Tamilnadu Highways Engineers, Rep.by its General Secretary, 35V, Taluk Office Road, Saidapet Cennnai-15 Chennai Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretry, Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9 2.The director General ( Highways) Highways Department, HRS Campus, Guindy, Chennai-25 3.the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Rep.By its Secretary, No.3, Frazer Bridge Road, VOC Nagar Park Town, chennai-3 Respondent(s)
PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to the issue of impugned order namely G.O.Ms.No.82, Highways and Small Ports (KH2) Department, dated 08.05.2012 and quash the same. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.N.Subramaniyan For Respondent(s):
Mr. R.L. Karthika, Govt. Advocate for R1 & R2
ORDER
By this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the action of the 1 st respondent in issuing GO.Ms.No.82, Highways and Small Ports (KH2) Department dated 08.05.2012, whereby, the 1 st respondent had fixed the cadre strength between Assistant Engineers and Junior Engineers in respect of 972 vacancies in the ratio of 75% and 25% as being contrary to Rule 18(a) of the TamilNadu Highways Engineering Servic Rules, 1956 [in short 'Rules'].
2. Heard Mr. N.Subramaniyan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mrs.R.L.Karthika, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.R.Bharanidharan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3 rd respondent.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the 1 st respondent, by the aforesaid GO issued, sought to fix the cadre strength of Assistant Engineers and Junior Engineers in respect of 972 vacancies, by the counter affidavit filed, have indicated that the impugned GO is not adopted.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the 2 nd respondent, by their counter affidavit had categorically stated that the 1 st respondent had initiated proposals for amending the Rules (Special Rules) for all post in various Departments and it is in final stage which includes the subject matter also.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner thus submits that since the respondents, by their counter affidavit, having categorically stated that the GO.Ms.No.82 which is impugned herein, has not been adopted till date and only Rule 18(a) of the Rules is being followed, the said statement made by the 2 nd respondent by their counter affidavit may be taken on record for disposing the present writ petition.
6. The learned Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 and 2, by drawing attention of this Court to the paragraphs 10 to 12 of the counter affidavit would submit that the respondents are not implementing GO.Ms.No.82 and are only following Rule 18(a) of the Rules and as such, the present writ petition has become infructuous.
7. I have taken note of the aforesaid submissions. The 2 nd respondent, by the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the said respondent as well as on behalf of the 1 st respondent in paragraphs 10 to 12, has categorically stated as under: '10. In this department, arrival of estimate of vacancies for the posts including Assistant and the various posts in other departments recruited by TNPSC is based on the ratio of the arising vacancies every year. The filling up of vacancies for the estimate of vacancies arrived every year is being done based on the Tamil Nadu Highways Engineering Service Rule 18(1), which was in practice prior to G.O.82. Further, the proposals of amendments of rules (Special rules) for all the posts in various departments has been initiated by the Government and it is in final stage, which includes the subject matter also. Based on the final decision by the Government recruitment rules will be followed.
11. It is submitted that, during the review of the special rules for Highways Department, has been decided to further review certain clauses which includes
recruitment ratio/Cadre strength between Assistant Engineers/Junior Engineers.
12. It is submitted that till date, only rule 18(a) of the Tamil Nadu Highways Engineering Service Rule is followed and G.O.Ms.No.82 Highways and Minor Ports department dated 8.5.2012 is not adopted.'
8. Since the respondent by counter affidavit having categorically made an assertion before this Court that GO.Ms.No.82, dated 08.05.2012 is not adopted and that the respondents are only following Rule 18(a) of the Rules, this Court is of the considered view that the grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition stands redressed and there is no necessity for this Court to test the vires of the aforesaid G.O.
9. Accordingly, placing the aforesaid assertion made on behalf of the respondents on record, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. msr 20-08-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes
To 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretry, Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9 2.The director General ( Highways) Highways Department, HRS Campus, Guindy, Chennai-25 3.the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Rep.By its Secretary, No.3, Frazer Bridge Road, VOC Nagar Park Town, Chennai-3
T.VINOD KUMAR J.
msr WP No. 12826 of 2019 & WMP.Nos.13027 and 13028 of 2019 20-08-2025