A.Sundar v. State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated :12.07.2017

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN W.A.[MD].No.130 of 2014 and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 A.Sundar ... Appellant/Writ Petitioner Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Chief Engineer (General) Highways Department, Chennai.

2.The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Nagarcoil, Kanyakumari District.

3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Nagarcoil, Kanyakumari District.

4.The Supervising Engineer, Highways Department, Tirunelveli District.

... Respondents / Respondents PRAYER :

Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).No.11728 of 2009, dated 02.01.2013.

Prayer in WP(MD). 11728/ 2009 :

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a WRIT OF CERTIORARIFIED MANDAMUS, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Ku.No.6432/2008/Aa5, dated 05-01-2009 on the file of the Respondent No.2 and quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the Respondent No.2 refix the petitioners original seniority by regularizing the service period of four days from 27-11-1997 to 30-11-1997 and to accord him promotion to the post of Road Inspector with effect from 26-09-2008 with all consequential benefits.

For Appellant : Mr.T. Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Additional Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

************* [Judgment of the Court was delivered by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.] The unsuccessful writ petitioner is on appeal, questioning the dismissal of his writ petition in W.P.(MD).No.11728 of 2009, dated 02 January 2013.

2.According to the writ petitioner, after passing his 10th standard examination, he joined duty in the respondent department as a Road Worker on temporary basis on 13 November 1997. He was attacked, when discharging his duty on 27 November 1997, leading to his hospitalization. He was discharged on 30 November 1997. Owing to his absence on the said four days, when he was absorbed as a permanent staff, his initial date of appointment was fixed as 27 November 1997, instead of 13 November 1997. This had an adverse impact on his seniority position. When the first respondent herein published the promotion list for the post of Road Inspector Grade II in the year 2008, the writ petitioner's name was not included. This was the because the promotion list was based on the date of permanent appointment.

3.On account of the non-calculation of the writ petitioner's four days of absence as one of service, his seniority had been downgraded. He therefore represented to the authorities for inclusion of those four days and accord him promotion to the post of Road Inspector Grade II, with effect from 26 August 2008. His request was rejected by the second respondent by order dated 05 January 2009. Hence, he was constrained to prefer the said writ petition. The learned single Judge, by order dated 02 January 2013, did not find any merit in the request of the writ petitioner and chose to dismiss the same and hence, this intra court appeal has been filed.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant pleaded that since the writ petitioner had suffered hospitalization leading to his absence from duty, only on account of the attack suffered by him when he was discharging his duties, the said period should also be counted. While the contention of the appellant is really having some force, we are not in a position to grant any relief, because the appellant chose to keep quiet for a very long time. The cause of action for the appellant, admittedly arose as early as in the year 1998. He chose to keep quite and file the instant writ petition only in 2009 i.e merely after 11 years. In matters concerning seniority and promotion, the aggrieved employee ought to approach the Court at the earliest point of time. If at this point of time, the seniority of the appellant was revised at his instance, it will certainly lead to unsettling of settled matters. Therefore on the ground of laches, the learned Single Judge rightly dismissed the writ petition. No exception can be taken to the said order.

5.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-I) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Chief Engineer (General), Highways Department, Chennai.

2.The Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Nagarcoil, Kanyakumari District.

3.The Assistant Divisional Engineer, Highways Department, Nagarcoil, Kanyakumari District.

4.The Supervising Engineer, Highways Department, Tirunelveli District.

+1cc to Mr.T. Lajapathi Roy Advocate in SR. No.65221 GSP/KM/DAS JS/SKN.RSK/SAR.1/1.08.2017/3P-6C W.A.[MD].No.130 of 2014 12.07.2017