S.Vincent Jeyanthi v. The State Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH W.P.(MD)No.18780 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD)No.14417, 14418 & 14420 of 2025 S.Vincent Jeyanthi ... Petitioner -vs1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Services Wing Ser 4(1) Section, Secretariat, St.George Fort, Chennai.

2. The Principal Secretary / Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai.

3. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

4. The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli, Tiruneveli District.

5. S.Singaram, Special Deputy Thasildar (Election) O/o.Thasildar Office Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.

... Respondents 1/6

PRAYER: Petition 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 passed by the 2nd respondent vide his proceedings in Se.Mu.Aa.No.Pani3(3)/01/472/2025 dated 27.06.2025 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Deputy Tahsildar on par with other juniors by including the name of the petitioner in the panel for the year 2023 along with all other monetary and Service benefits, within the time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.H.Mohammed Imran For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani (R1 to R4) Special Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the second respondent in Se.Mu.Aa.No.Pani3(3)/01/472/2025 dated 27.06.2025 and seeking a direction to the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Deputy Tahsildar on par with other juniors by including the name of the petitioner in the panel for the year 2023 along with all other monetary and service benefits, within the time stipulated by this Court.

2/6

2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is disposed at the stage of admission itself.

3. Since no adverse orders are going to be passed against the fifth respondent, notice to him is hereby dispensed with.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as 'Senior Revenue Inspector' in the year 2012 and she is presently working as 'Head Quarters Deputy Tahsildar' at Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District. A charge memo dated 20.09.2017 came to be issued against the petitioner and others and the charges were also proved. The third respondent, vide his proceedings dated 28.06.2020 imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of three months without cumulative effect to the petitioner. While this being so, the fourth respondent published the panel of Assistant for promotion to the post of Deputy Tahsildar vide proceedings dated 03.10.2023, wherein the petitioner's name was found at S.No.19. However, the third respondent promoted only the juniors of the petitioner to the post of Deputy Tahsildar, by overlooking the petitioner's seniority. The petitioner claimed his seniority before the second respondent. The second respondent rejected his claim 3/6

through the impugned order. Challenging the same, this writ petition came to be filed.

5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents submits that the petitioner, aggrieved by the impugned order, has a revisional remedy. The learned Special Government Pleader further submits that the only remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the first respondent herein, who is the revisional authority, if aggrieved by the impugned order. Without approaching the said authority, the petitioner has straightaway approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. This Court, after considering the rival submissions, is of the considered view that the petitioner will have to necessarily prefer a revision before the first respondent, if aggrieved by the impugned order.

7. For the foregoing reasons, the petitioner is directed to prefer a revision as against the impugned order before the first respondent herein, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the first respondent shall dispose of the revision 4/6

within a period of one month thereafter. It is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the first respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

8. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

18.07.2025 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No sm 5/6

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

sm TO:-

1. The Secretary to Government, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Services Wing Ser 4(1) Section, Secretariat, St.George Fort, Chennai.

2. The Principal Secretary / Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai.

3. The District Collector, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

4. The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli, Tiruneveli District.

Order made in W.P.(MD)No.18780 of 2025 Dated:

18.07.2025 6/6