K.Srinivasan v. The Director Of Agriculture
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.(MD) No.22582 of 2025 and W.M.P.(MD) No.17703 & 17704 of 2025 K.Srinivasan : Petitioner Vs.
The Director of Agriculture, Directorate of Agriculture, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
: Respondent P RAYER:
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records passed by the respondent herein in Letter No.PaUP1/ 59205/ 2025 dated 07.07.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to issue the estimated vacancies for the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture for the year 2025-2026 and the number of vacancies reserved for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities and thereafter to draw the panel of Agricultural Officers fit for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture (Extension) for the year 2025-2026 in consonance with G.O.(Ms) No.06 Welfare of Differently Abled Persons (DAP-3.2) Department, dated 21.06.2025. 1/6
For Petitioner : Ms.M.Padmavathy For Respondent : Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandhran Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the Letter issued by the respondent in No.PaUP1/ 59205/ 2025 dated 07.07.2025 and consequently seeking to direct the respondent to issue the estimated vacancies for the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture for the year 2025-2026 and the number of vacancies reserved for Persons with Benchmark Disabilities and thereafter to draw the panel of Agricultural Officers fit for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture (Extension) for the year 2025-2026 in consonance with G.O.(Ms) No.06 Welfare of Differently Abled Persons (DAP-3.2) Department, dated 21.06.2025.
2. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.
2/6
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who is a differently abled person with locomotive disability, was appointed as Agricultural Officer (Extension) in the year 2013. Since the government has not followed the reservation for promotion to the persons with benchmark disability, which is contrary to the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court, which was allowed by directing the respondents to provide 4% reservation to the differently abled persons in the promotional post of Assistant Director of Agriculture.
4. He would further submit that the government has also issued a government order in G.O.(Ms) No.06 Welfare of Differently Abled Persons (DAP-3.2) Department, dated 21.06.2025 providing 4% reservation to the differently abled persons in the promotional post of Assistant Director of Agriculture. While this being so, the respondent issued the impugned promotion panel list to the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture calling for service details of the employees, without even referring to the aforesaid GO. Challenging the same, this writ petition came to be filed.
3/6
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would also submit that the petitioner is entitled to be considered for promotion to the aforesaid post. In the present case, number of vacancies has not been revealed and the respondent simply called for the service details of the employees, which is unsustainable one. Unless the respondent earmarks the eligible number of vacancies, the petitioner will not be given promotion.
6. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that the present panel is for the persons who have been recruited for the period from 1993 to 2008, whereas the petitioner was recruited only in the year 2013 and none of his juniors were enlisted in the said panel. Already 4% reservation was allotted to the persons with disability as per the aforesaid GO. Totally, there are seven differently abled persons, who are seniors to the petitioner and the last candidate, who is in the list under SC category named V.Sarojini Devi, was appointed in the year 2012 and one T.Anuradha under BC category was appointed in the year 2008. The petitioner is a BC candidate, who came into service only in the year 2013 and none of his juniors were enlisted for promotion.
4/6
7. On perusal of the records, it is seen that the differently abled persons, who are seniors to the petitioner are already waiting for promotion to the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture. While this being so, the petitioner now seeking promotion supersession of his seniors is devoid of merit and untenable. In view of the above, the prayer sought for by the petitioner is totally misconceived and hence, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
19.08.2025 Index : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No Sm 5/6
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
Sm To:- The Director of Agriculture, Directorate of Agriculture, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
W.P.(MD) No.22582 of 2025 19.08.2025 6/6