Madras High Court
M.Narendiran vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 28 July, 2021
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S.Ramesh
W.P.No.28873 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 28.07.2021
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
W.P.No.28873 of 2017
and
W.M.P.No.31087 of 2017
M.Narendiran ...Petitioner
Vs
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
rep. by its Principal Secretary to
Government,
Rural Development and Panchayat raj Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director,
Commissionerate of Rural Development and
Panchayat Raj,
Panagal Building, Chennai-15.
3.The District Collector,
Kancheepuram District,
Kancheepuram. ...Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for
entire records relating to G.O.(1-D) No.408, Panchayat Development and
Panchayat raj (E-7) department dated 03.08.2015 on the file of the 1st
respondent herein in so far as it declares the probation of the petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/10
W.P.No.28873 of 2017
herein w.e.f 05.04.2014 instead of 31.05.2010 and quash the same and
consequently direct the respondents herein to forthwith declare the
probation of the petitioner herein in the post of Junior Assistant w.e.f
31.05.2010, the date of passing of the department test and pay all
monetary benefits w.e.f 01.06.2010.
For Petitioner :Mr.V.R.Rajasekaran
For Respondents : Mr.K.V.Sajeev Kumar
Government Counsel
ORDER
By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. Through the impugned Government Order in G.O.(1-D) No.408, Panchayat Development and Panchayat Raj (E-7) department dated 03.08.2015 passed by the first respondent herein, the petitioner's probation was declared with effect from 05.04.2014 instead of 31.05.2010, on the ground that the petitioner had belatedly completed the foundational training at the Civil Service Training Institute at Bhavanisagar, Tamil Nadu. Admittedly, the delay in deputing the petitioner for the foundational training was on the part of the respondents on the administrative side.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 2/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017
3. The issue as to whether, the respondents will be justified in declaring the probation from the date of completion of the training, which was belatedly held, came up for consideration before this Court in various cases and this Court had held that the respondents are not justified in declaring the probation on the date of completion of the training. In one such order passed in the case of T.Gunaseela Subramani and 2 others Vs. The Principal Secretary to Government, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department and others passed in W.P.(MD) No.15585 of 2018, dated 29.03.2021, this Court had held as follows:-
"2. The petitioners herein had undergone the foundational training at the Civil Service Training Institute at Bhavanisagar, Tamil Nadu, pursuant to which, their completion of probation was declared through G.O.(D) No.164 Commercial Taxes and Registration Department dated 30.04.2015. Subsequently, the first petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant on 15.07.2015 and the second and third petitioners were promoted on 01.07.2015 and 13.11.2015 respectively.
3. The petitioners' declaration of probation came to be cancelled through the impugned https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 3/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017 government order in G.O.(D) No.83 Commercial Taxes and Registration Department dated 26.04.2018, predominantly on the ground that, the petitioners herein had not completed their foundational training within their two years of probation period, as required under Rule 32(a)(1) of the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules and that their probation requires to be declared from the day following their completion of the foundational training.
3. Rule 32(A)(1) of the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules reads as follows:-
“32 (A) (1) Every person appointed to a category by direct recruitment shall be on probation for a total period of two years on duty within a continuous period of three years. The individual in the cadre of Junior Assistant is eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant on satisfying the following conditions:-
1. His probation declared successful.
2. His service should be regularized in the cadre of Junior Assistant.
3. He should complete the foundational training at Civil Service Training Institute at Bhavanisagar, Tamil Nadu.
4. He should successfully complete the departmental examination conducted by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission.”
4. As per the aforesaid Rules, among other https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 4/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017 conditions, the probationer is required to complete the foundational training at Civil Service Training Institute, at Bhavanisagar, within the probationary period. As per Rule 26(A)(2) of the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service Rules, the date of passing of the foundational training or departmental tests, is significant for declaration of probation. The said Rules reads as follows:-
“26 (A) (2) in cases where the passing of an examination or test confers on a Government Servant the title to any right, benefit or concession, such title should be deemed to have accrued on the day following the last day of the examination or test which the passed. In cases where the examination or test can be passed in installments, the title to the right, benefit or concession will be deemed to have accrued on the day following the last day of the examination in the subject or subjects in which he had passed.”
5. Admittedly, the mandatory foundational training at the Civil Service Training Institute at Bhavani Sagar was belatedly held and the petitioners were not deputed for the training, during their period of probation. Such a statement is ratified in the G.O.(D)No.164, Commercial Taxes and Administration Department dated 30.04.2015, as well as in the counter affidavit filed before this https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 5/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017 Court. The provisions of Rule 32 would apply to such probationers, who have been nominated to undergo their training during their period of probation, which is for a total period of two years on duty, within a continuous period of three years. When the petitioners were nominated for the training after more than four years, they cannot be expected to complete such training, as required under Rule 32(A) and therefore, the provision itself may not be applicable to these petitioners, particularly, when the lapse was on the part of the respondents.
6. Furthermore, there is no Rule to the effect that the training should not be completed in the second or subsequent attempts during the probation period. In other words, there is no bar for the probationers to undertake the tests in any number of attempts, within the probation period. This observation is made in the light of the counter averments of the respondents that these petitioners had completed the training in their second attempt only. Even otherwise, since the petitioners were deprived of an opportunity to participate in the training programme within their probation period, there may not be any justification on the part of the respondents to refer to the failure in completing the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 6/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017 training at the first attempt.
7. Since there are no Regulations governing the declaration of probation for belated deputation to training, owing to administrative delays, the reference to Rule 26(A)(2) that the petitioners' declaration of probation will commence on the day following the completion of training, is unjustifiable and illegal. Consequently, the impugned Government Order cancelling the declaration of probation of the petitioners cannot be sustained."
4. The aforesaid order is self explanatory. As such, the impugned order declaring the petitioner's probation with effect from 05.04.2014 cannot be sustained. Consequently, it requires to be held that the probation of the petitioner herein requires to be declared with effect from 31.05.2010, which is the date of completion of the 2 year period of probation.
5. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 03.08.2015 passed by the first respondent is quashed. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the respondents herein to forthwith declare the probation of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 7/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017 the petitioner herein, with effect from 31.05.2010, atleast within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In view of the aforesaid direction, the petitioner shall also be entitled for all the service and monetary benefits to which he may be entitled to, with effect from 31.05.2010.
6. The writ petition stands allowed, accordingly. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
28.07.2021 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking order/non-speaking order hvk https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 8/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017 To
1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Rural Development and Panchayat raj Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director, Commissionerate of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Panagal Building, Chennai-15.
3.The District Collector, Kancheepuram District, Kancheepuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 9/10 W.P.No.28873 of 2017 M.S.RAMESH,J.
hvk W.P.No. 28873 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.31087 of 2017 28.07.2021 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ 10/10