S.R. Chitra v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

in W.A.No.SR163709 of 2023 R. MAHADEVAN, J.

and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

(Order of the Court was made by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) This petition has been filed by the petitioners/appellants to grant leave to file a writ appeal against the order dated 10.11.2023 passed by the learned Judge, in W.P.No.35800 of 2019.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were selected and appointed as Typists by the TNPSC under Group IV service - 2006-2007 batch in August 2009; and that, their services were regularized in the post of Typist from the date of appointment. They were promoted as Assistants against the regular vacancies, after inclusion of their names in the panel 2012-13; and that, their services were regularised in the post of Assistant vide proceedings dated 20.01.2015. The learned counsel further submitted that the writ petitioners, who are directly recruited Assistants through TNPSC and they were posted to the respective departments, in December 2012, preferred WP. No.35800 of 2019 seeking to quash the proceedings of the

Director of Medical and Rural Health Services, Chennai, dated 20.02.2015 and treat them as seniors for all purposes including promotion and consequential benefits. The learned Judge vide order dated 10.11.2023 allowed the writ petition, by directing the respondents to re-fix the seniority within a period of twelve weeks. According to the learned counsel, the writ petitioners who joined as Assistants in December 2012, are admittedly juniors to the petitioners herein, who were appointed and posted as Assistants in October, 2012 itself. In view of the order so passed by the learned Judge, the right of the petitioners would be severely affected and hence, they sought to challenge the same by filing a writ appeal.

It is also pointed out by the learned counsel that the petitioners are similarly placed like that of the private respondents in the writ petition, who have already preferred W.A.No.3315 of 2023, which is pending before this court. Stating so, the learned counsel sought permission of this court to file a writ appeal as against the order passed by the learned Judge in the writ petition. 3.The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 has no serious objection for ordering this petition. 4.

petition, and having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, leave is granted and this petition is ordered accordingly. [R.M.D., J.] [M.S.Q., J.] 05.01.2024 nsd

R. MAHADEVAN, J.

and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.

nsd 05.01.2024