M.Pitchaimani v. The District Collector
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.06.2019
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P(MD)Nos.13283 to 13285 of 2016 and WMP(MD)Nos.9977 to 9979 of 2016 M.Pitchaimani .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.13283/2016 M.Indirani .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.13284/2016 V.Padmavathy .. Petitioner in WP(MD)No.13285/2016 Vs.
1. The District Collector, Karur District.
2. I.Geetha Rural Welfare Officer, Grade - I, Aravakurichi Panchayat Union, Karur District. ... Respondents in all W.Ps. Prayer: Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 29.04.2016 passed by the 1st respondent in Na.Ka.Pa.Va.4/2309/2014 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to re-fix the seniority list within the time frame to be fixed by this Court. For Petitioners : Mr.R.Lakshmanan For R1 : Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar Additional Government Pleader in all the writ petitions.
COMMON ORDER Challenging the provisional seniority panel list issued by the first respondent dated 29.04.2016, these writ petitions have been filed.
2.According to the petitioners, they are working as Assistants in the respective Panchayat Unions at Karur District and they are at the verge of promotion to the post of Deputy BDO. While so, the first respondent issued the provisional seniority panel list dated 29.04.2016, wherein, the second respondent, who is a junior to the petitioners was kept in the higher rank than that of the petitioners, for which, the petitioners have made their respective objections dated 14.06.2016, 16.06.2016 and 15.06.2016. But the same have not been considered by the first respondent. The grievance of the petitioners is that their names should be kept in the higher rank than that of the name of the second respondent in the provisional seniority panel list. The first respondent without https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
considering the same, published the said list, placing the petitioners below the name of the second respondent, who is a junior to the petitioners. Challenging the same, these writ petitions have been filed.
3.At the time of hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners brought to the notice of this Court to the proceedings dated 26.04.2018 issued by the first respondent. According to the petitioners, the said proceedings is in respect of promotion panel list for the year 2018-2019 as on 01.03.2018 and the said list has also been issued without considering the objections raised by the petitioners.
4.At this juncture, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent submitted that the first respondent had already issued the proceedings dated 22.09.2016 in Na.Ka.Pava9/4624/2014, appointing Deputy Block Development Officers in the respective places mentioned therein and if at all the petitioners have any grievance, they have to challenge the said subsequent proceedings before the appropriate forum and therefore, the prayer sought in the present writ petitions has become infructuous.
5.From a perusal of the records, it is seen that as rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Government Pleader, the first respondent had already appointed Deputy Block Development Officers by the proceedings dated 22.09.2016 in Na.Ka.Pava9/4624/2014 and therefore, the prayer sought in the writ petitions cannot be sustained. However, it is open to the petitioners to challenge the proceedings dated 22.09.2016 before the appropriate forum, if they are so advised.
6.The writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, WMP(MD)Nos.9977 to 9979 of 2016 are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AD-II) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) To The District Collector, Karur District.
+3.CC. To Mr.R.Lakshmanan, Advocate in SR No.69909 +1.CC. To SPL. GOVT. PLEADER, in SR No.70288 W.P(MD)Nos.13283 to 13285 of 2016 19.06.2019 MJ MK (04.07.2019) 2P 6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/