The State Of Tamil Nadu v. P.Nagarajan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.06.2022
CORAM
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice PARESH UPADHYAY and The Hon'ble Mrs. Justice V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN W.A.No.1433 of 2022 & C.M.P.No.9277 of 2022 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by its Secretary, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Inspector General of Police, Registration Department, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 028.
.. Appellants/Respondents Vs.
1.P.Nagarajan 2.A.Dayabaran .. Respondents/ Petitioner & 3rd Respondent Appeal preferred under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated 02.09.2021 made in W.P.No.12189 of 2009. Prayer in W.P.No.12189 of 2009:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to G.O.(Ms) No.109 dt.13.11.2008 and G.O(2D) No.179 dt.28.11.2008 issued by the 1st respondent and quash the same in so far as the 3rd respondent's promotion to the post of District Registrar overlooking the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to consider and promote the petitioner to the post of District Registrar with effect from 28.11.2008 before the 3rd respondent's promotion as much with due seniority, arrears of salary and all consequential benefits.
For Appellants :
Mr.R.Neelakandan, Addl. Advocate General assisted by Mr.Abishek Murthy, Govt. Advocate For Respondents : Ms.Vaigai, Sr. Counsel for M/s.Anna Mathew for R1
JUDGMENT
(Made by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.) Challenge in this appeal is made to the order dated 02.09.2021 recorded on W.P.No.12189 of 2009. This appeal is by the respondents/ State authorities.
2. Mr.R.Neelakandan, learned Additional Advocate General for the appellants submitted that the order impugned in this appeal is erroneous since the seniority of the writ petitioner/ first respondent would not have been considered from the date of his entry as Junior Assistant since it is a District level post and further promotions are at the State level and therefore that could not be a guiding factor. It is submitted that, on the basis of the precedents relied by the writ petitioner, relief could not have been granted. It is submitted that this appeal be entertained.
3. On the other hand, Ms.Vaigai, learned senior advocate for the writ petitioner/ first respondent has submitted that the issue involved in this matter, as noted by learned single Judge, is already concluded by the number of decisions of this Court and also by the policy of the Government as contained in Government Order which is taken note of by learned single Judge and therefore no interference be made by this Court. Additionally, it is submitted that the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos.17828 to 17832 of 2000 by order dated 24.02.2005 dismissed the writ petitions filed by the State. Specific reliance is placed on para 7 thereof. It is submitted that this appeal be dismissed.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and having considered the material on record, this Court finds as under:
4.1 The dispute is with regard to the basis of promotion in the Registration Department of the State, as to whether the entry in the cadre of Junior Assistant should be the guiding
factor for the purpose of determining the seniority for further promotion or it is the subsequent seniority which should be the guiding factor.
4.2 The bone contention of the State, in substance is to the effect that, since the writ petitioner and the private respondent were not working in the same district in the cadre of Junior Assistant, they were given promotion on the post of Assistant in the respective District. The writ petitioner was not promoted when the private respondent was promoted and that issue should not have been gone into by this Court and what is granted is only the consequential promotion.
4.3 We find that what should be the guiding factor for the purpose of higher promotions in Registration Department is undisputed. Learned Single Judge in para 5 of the order has inter-alia noted to the effect that the State has accepted the position that it is the seniority in the cadre of Junior Assistant which should be guiding factor. This has to be reconciled with the case of the writ petitioner as stated in para 7 and 10 of his affidavit. Conjoint consideration/ comparison of this leaves no room to come to the conclusion that the writ petitioner had joined the service as Junior Assistant on 05.09.1977 and the private respondent had joined the service thereafter. The writ petition was filed in the year 2009 more particularly in view of the policy of the State as contained in G.O.(3D) No.
2 Commercial Taxes and Registration (H2) Department dated 12.03.2007. The said Government Order was on the basis of the various orders passed by the Administrative Tribunal and High Court. This is taken note of by learned single Judge. 4.4 We have considered the said Government Order as well and the reasons recorded by the learned single Judge. We find that by granting relief to the writ petitioner, learned single Judge has ultimately given a direction to the State to implement its own policy, which is based on earlier decisions of the High Court. We find that such a direction can not be said to be an error, much less any error apparent on face of record which may call for any interference in this intra-court appeal in exercise of power under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. 4.
5 There is an additional factor in favour of the writ petitioner. Independent of the findings recorded by learned single Judge, the case of the petitioner is also covered by the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in W.P. Nos.17828 to 17832 of 2000 order dated 24.02.2005. We find that the view taken by learned single Judge, independently is supported by the said decision of the Division Bench.
5. For the reasons recorded above, this writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi/4 To 1.The Secretary, State of Tamil Nadu, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Inspector General of Police, Registration Department, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 028.
+1cc to M/s.Anna Mathew, Advocate, S.R.No.34626 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.35313 W.A.No.1433 of 2022 SR(CO) SB(23/06/2022)