A.Kadar Mohideen, v. State Of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 31.01.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH A.Kadar Mohideen

...Petitioner

-Vs1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Chief Secretary to Government, Public (Spl.A) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

3.The Principal Secretary/ Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.Rt.No.3927, Public (Special.A) Department, dated 02.11.2015 and quash the same and direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the panel of Deputy Collector 1/4

for promotion to the post of District Revenue Officer in the year 2001 in the appropriate place and confer all the consequential benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Sivalingam for M/s.C.S.Associate For Respondents : Mr.M.Shahjahan, Special Government Pleader

ORDER

Heard Mr.V.Sivalingam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Shahjahan, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.

2. The petitioner, who had retired from service on 30.04.2004, seeks for inclusion of his name in the promotional panel for the year 2001 to the post of District Revenue Officer and consequently grant him notional promotion.

3. The only ground raised by the petitioner in this writ petition is that his junior R.Meenakshisundaram has been included in the panel and promoted as a District Revenue Officer in the year 2001.

4. The respondents, in the counter affidavit, have clarified that there are two R.Meenakshisundaram, wherein one is junior to the petitioner and the other is 2/4

senior. Among these two R.Meenakshisundaram, the person, who has been promoted to the post of District Revenue Officer, is senior to the petitioner and the person referred to by the petitioner has not been promoted. Thus, the petitioner seems to have mistakenly referred to his senior as junior to him.

5. In view of the factual error, the petitioner would not be entitled for the claim of promotion on the ground of discrimination. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

31.01.2023 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No hvk To 1.The Chief Secretary to Government, Public (Spl.A) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

3.The Principal Secretary/ Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.

3/4

M.S.RAMESH,J.

hvk W.P.No.

31.01.2023 4/4