Madras High Court
S.Sasisivanandam vs The District Collector on 12 October, 2011
Author: D.Hariparanthaman
Bench: D.Hariparanthaman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATAURE AT MADRAS
DATED 12.10.2011
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN
W.P.No.16697 of 2007
S.Sasisivanandam .. Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Thoothukudi District,
Thoothukudi.
2.The Director of Rural Development,
Chennai-15. .. Respondents
The original application No.4117 of 2003 has been filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and after abolition of the Tribunal, the same was transferred to this Court and renumbered as Writ petition seeking relief to call for the records pertaining to the order of the first respondent herein passed in his Proceedings No.VI4/12918/2002 dated 4.10.2002 rejecting the petitioner's request for inclusion of his name in the panel of Rural Welfare Officers Grade-I fit for promotion as Extension Officer drawn for the year 2002, in the appropriate place and the consequential order passed by the second respondent herein rejecting the petitioner's appeal petition in his Proceedings No.Na.Ka.3556/2003/C3 dated 21.4.2003 and quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the panel of Rural Welfare Officers Grade-I fit for promotion as Extension Officers drawn for the year 2002 in the appropriate place above his immediate junior and consequentially further direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Extension Officer with effect from 7.4.2003 the date of promotion of his immediate juniors with all consequential monetary and service benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.Ravi Shanmugam
For Respondents : Mr.V.Subbiah
Special Govt. Pleader
O R D E R
The writ petition is filed to call for the records pertaining to the order of the first respondent herein passed in his Proceedings No.VI4/12918/2002 dated 4.10.2002 rejecting the petitioner's request for inclusion of his name in the panel of Rural Welfare Officers Grade-I fit for promotion as Extension Officer drawn for the year 2002 in the appropriate place and the consequential order passed by the second respondent herein rejecting the petitioner's appeal petition in his Proceedings No.Na.Ka.3556/2003/C3, dated 21.4.2003 and quash the same and consequentially, direct the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the panel of Rural Welfare Officers Grade-I fit for promotion as Extension Officers drawn for the year 2002 in the appropriate place, above his immediate junior, and consequentially further direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Extension Officer with effect from 7.4.2003, the date of promotion of his immediate junior with all consequential monetary and service benefits.
2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as Surveyor-cum-Draughtsman on consolidated pay in the Survey Department by order dated 15.3.1983. Thereafter, the petitioner was granted time scale of pay. As per the Government policy, the petitioner was redeployed from Survey Department to Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department by G.O.Ms.No.308, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department dated 11.6.1990.
3.Thereafter, he was appointed as Junior Assistant in Srivaigundam Panchayat Union, Thoothukudi District by order dated 18.9.1990. In the year 1992, he passed all the Departmental Tests for promotion for the post of Assistant. The Government issued G.O.12, Social Welfare and Nutritious Meal Programme Department dated 20.1.1998 regularising the service of the petitioner as Junior Assistant retrospectively with effect from 18.9.1990.
4.Thereafter, the petitioner was sent for Bhavanisagar training from 2.6.1998 to 31.7.1998 and he had completed the training successfully. The first respondent passed an order dated 2.11.1998 to the effect that the petitioner had completed the probation satisfactorily. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Assistant by an order dated 2.2.1999.
5.Though the petitioner was promoted as Assistant by order dated 2.2.1999, but his seniority was denied above his immediate junior Thiru.Jayaramachandran. After repeated representations, the revised seniority of the petitioner in the cadre of Assistant was fixed by the first respondent by order dated 17.2.2001 at Serial No.126C, above one Thiru.Jayaramachandran, who was promoted as Assistant on 21.6.1993. The petitioner was placed above Thiru.Jayaramachandran since the petitioner is senior to Thiru.Jayaramachandran. The first respondent took note of the instructions dated 23.4.1994 of the Director of Rural Development and the letter dated 02.03.1999 that the individual right should not be affected due to administrative changes in fixing the seniority of the petitioner.
6.Thereafter, the petitioner was posted as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I by an order dated 6.9.2001 of the first respondent. The posts of Rural Welfare Officer Grade I and Assistant are the equal posts. One should have served as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I for one year to get promotion to the post of Extension Officer.
7.The first respondent prepared a panel dated 16.09.2002 of Rural Welfare Officers fit for promotion as Extension Officer for the year 2002. The crucial date for inclusion of names in the panel is 01.03.2002. While, Thiru.Jayaramachandran was included in the panel at Serial No.7, the petitioner was not included in the panel. Based on the panel, Thiru.Jayaramachandran was promoted as Extension Officer on 7.4.2003. The reason for non inclusion in the panel is that the petitioner did not serve one year as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I as on 1.3.2002.
8.The petitioner made representation to the first respondent to include his name in the panel dated 16.09.2002. He also stated that it was not his fault for having not served one year in Rural Welfare Officer Grade I post as on 1.3.2002, but the first respondent rejected the request of the petitioner by an order dated 4.10.2002 stating that the petitioner did not serve one year as Rural Welfare Officer as on 1.3.2002 and therefore, he could not be included in the panel.
9.The petitioner took up the matter before the second respondent. The second respondent also rejected the request of the petitioner by an order dated 21.04.2003. Hence, the petitioner filed O.A.No.4117 of 2002 (W.P.No.16697 of 2007) to quash the order of the first respondent dated 4.10.2002 and the second respondent dated 21.4.2003 and to direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the panel of the Rural Welfare Officer fit for promotion as Extension Officer for the year 2002 and to promote him as Extension Officer from the date on which the immediate junior was promoted.
10.The respondents filed counter affidavit refuting the allegations. The crux of the allegation made in the counter affidavit is that the petitioner did not put in one year of service in the post of Rural Welfare Officer Grade I as on 1.3.002 and therefore, he could not be included in the panel of the year 2002 for Rural Welfare Officers fit for promotion as Extension Officers.
11.Heard both sides.
12.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he was promoted as Assistant by the order dated 2.2.1999 and he was posted as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I on dated 6.9.2001. The posting as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I was made by the first respondent in September 2001. The matter of posting lies in the domain of the first respondent and hence, the petitioner could not be blamed for not serving as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I for one year as on 1.3.2002 for inclusion in the panel of Rural Welfare Officers fit for promotion as Extension Officers for the year 2002.
13.The learned counsel for petitioner has relied on the judgment of this Court dated 4.9.2007 in W.P.Nos.47872 and 47885 of 2006 and 7791 of 2007 (M.CHANDRASEKAR AND OTHERS VS. THE DIRECTOR OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, CHENNAI AND OTHERS). According to him, the above said judgment squarely covers this issue.
14.On the otherhand, the learned Government Advocate seeks to sustain the impugned order based on the counter affidavit. Paragraph six of the counter affidavit is extracted hereunder:
"The applicant submitted a representation to the first respondent stating to include his name in the panel for the post of Extension for the year 2002 in which his immediate junior found place. Reply was given by the first respondent to the applicant stating that as the applicant had not acquired one year service qualification in the cadre of RWO on 01.03.2002 which was the crucial date for panel for the year 2002, his name could not be included in the panel for the post of Extension Officer for the year 2002."
15.The petitioner was promoted as Assistant on 2.2.1999 and he was posted as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I by the order of the first respondent dated 6.9.2001. Hence, as on 1.3.2002, he did not render one year service as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I. The only reason given in the impugned orders is that the petitioner did not serve one year as Rural Welfare Officer Grade I as on 1.3.2002 for inclusion of his name in the panel of Rural Welfare Officers fit for promotion as Extension Officer for the year 2002 and hence, his request was rejected.
16.The learned counsel for the petitioner has rightly contended that the judgment of this Court dated 4.9.2007 in W.P.Nos.47872 and 47885 of 2006 and 7791 of 2007 is squarely applicable to this case. The relevant portion of the above said judgment reads as follows:
"8.Under these circumstances, the petitioners cannot be denied the benefit of inclusion in the panel, on the ground that they did not possess the service qualification. After all, the service qualification cannot be equated to the qualification of a pass in the departmental test. While the pass in a departmental test may be in the hands of the individual, the posting of the individual to a particular post, is not within the hands of the individual. Therefore, the respondents ought to have formulated and implemented a policy providing equal opportunity to all persons to acquire the service qualifications. Since the respondents have failed to do so, the petitioners were not at fault and on that ground, they should not have been omitted to be included in the panel."
17.In the light of the above decision, the writ petition is allowed. No costs. The impugned orders dated 04.10.2002 and 21.4.2003 passed by the first and second respondents respectively are quashed. The respondents are directed to include the petitioner's name in the panel of Rural Welfare Officer Grade I fit for promotion to the post of Extension Officer for the year 2002 and also promote the petitioner from the date on which his immediate junior Thiru.Jayaramachandran was promoted. The respondents are directed to complete the above said exercise within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
cla To
1.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.
2.The Director of Rural Development, Chennai 15