Madras High Court
R.Angammal vs The Engineer-In-Chief on 3 February, 2021
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012
R.Angammal ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Engineer-in-Chief, WRO &
Chief Engineer (General), PWD,
Chepauk, Chennai.
2.Mr.S.Manohar,
Senior Draughting Officer,
Cosesthalayar Basin Division,
Water Resources Organisation, PWD,
Thiruvallur.
3.Mrs.S.Dilsath Begam,
Senior Draughting Officer,
O/o Executive Engineer,
Water Resources Organisation, PWD,
Madurai -2.
4.Mr.K.Ethiraj,
Senior Draughting Officer,
Design, Research, Construction,
Support Division (Project),
Water Resources Organisation, PWD,
Salem-7.
1/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012
5.Mr.Veluchamy,
Senior Draughting Officer,
Periyar Dam Special Division,
Water Resources Organisation, PWD,
Cumbum.
6.Mrs.M.Boso Agnes Mary,
Senior Draughting Officer,
Building Construction Division,
Public Works Department,
Chennai-5. ... Respondents
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to
issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to
the impugned order, passed by the first respondent in his proceedings
Letter No.S5(3)/53664/2011-1, dated 28.03.2012 and quash the same as
illegal and consequently direct the first respondent to include the
petitioner's name in the seniority list for the post of Special Grade Senior
Draughting Officer.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Arivalagan
For Respondents : Mr.D.Muruganantham
Additional Government Pleader
for R.1
: No Appearance for R.2 to R.6
*****
2/10
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order, passed by the first respondent in his proceedings Letter No.S5(3)/53664/2011-1, dated 28.03.2012 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the first respondent to include the petitioner's name in the seniority list for the post of Special Grade Senior Draughting Officer.
2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner entered as an Assistant Draughtsman in the office of the Assistant Director, District Employment Officer, Madurai on 31.05.1978 and got promotion as Draughtsman III on 30.05.1980, as Draughtsman II on 15.07.1983, as Draughtsman I on 10.01.2005, as per the orders of the Chief Engineer (General), PWD, Chepauk, Chennai. Further, the petitioner passed the Diploma in Civil Engineering in the year 1977 and passed Account Test for Public Works Department Officers and Subordinates and further she had undergone the Special Training in Drawing Works from 30.10.1990 to 16.11.1990 and again from 10.12.2001 to 28.09.2007. All her 3/10 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 promotions had been done by one Unit Office viz., Chief Engineer (General), PWD, Chennai.
3. It is further averred that combined one unit inter-se seniority list was prepared as per the guideline issued in the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. Accordingly, the seniority of the promotees of Junior Draughting Officer during the year 1980 have been fixed in 1984-1985 year seniority list and in the above said seniority list, those promoted as Senior Draughting Officer during 2005 were found place. As per the said list, the petitioner's name should have been found place in serial No.165. However, the petitioner's juniors, who have been promoted as Draughting Officers in the year 2006-2007 after her promotion, were found place in the seniority list and her name was left over. Further the petitioner claimed that she is the senior most person. Therefore, in the seniority list of Special Grade Senior Draughting Officer, dated 11.08.2011, her name must be placed in the serial No.16, immediately after the name of S.Radha. However, the petitioner's name was not found in the list. Thereby she made a representation on 18.02.2011 through proper channel, however, the said representation was 4/10 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 not considered. Again, the petitioner made another representation dated 14.10.2011. Since the petitioner was due to retire on 31.10.2014, she filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.13083 of 2011 for mandamus to direct the respondent to consider her representations dated 29.08.2011 and 14.10.2011 in the light of the terms stipulated in the proceedings of the first respondent, dated 11.08.2011.
4. This Court, by its order dated 15.11.2011, issued a direction to the respondent therein to pass orders on the representation of the petitioner, before the finalisation of the inter se seniority list for the next promotional post of Special Grade Senior Draughting Officer for the year 2010-2011. In compliance of the above said order, the respondents rejected the petitioner's request on 18.03.2012 by passing the present impugned order. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed.
5. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the petitioner was promoted as Junior Draughting Officer on 29.10.1979, whereas the other persons viz., Mohan Raj and Radha, were promoted subsequent to the petitioner's promotion. However, they were 5/10 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 given promotion to the post of Special Grade Draughting Officer by overlooking the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner made a representation to the respondents to fix the seniority and promote her over and above her juniors. He would further submit that though the petitioner was retired in the year 2014, this Court may refix her seniority and grant notional promotion for the purpose of monetary benefits. Accordingly, he would pray for appropriate orders.
6. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent would submit that admittedly, the petitioner was promoted as Junior Draughting Officer prior to one Mohan Raj and Radha on 29.10.1979. However this was happened due to the errors occurred in the Draughting Officials seniority list. However those errors have been rectified in the seniority list of Draughting Officials, vide circular dated 24.11.2006, in accordance with the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in T.A.No.300 of 1989, dated 19.06.1991 and that order was also upheld by the order of the Honourable Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition Nos.7218-7150 of 1992, dated 19.04.1994 and without challenging the seniority list 6/10 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 prepared and circulated on 24.11.2006, filing the present writ petition by the petitioner is not sustainable and accordingly, he would pray for dismissal of the writ petition.
7. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and perused the materials placed on record.
8. The facts in the present case are not in dispute. Admittedly the petitioner entered into service as Assistant Draughtsman in the year 1978 and further she was promoted as Junior Draughting Officer on 29.10.1979. Though one S.Manohar had joined in the post of Assistant Draughtsman in the year 1973, he was fully eligible to get promotion as Junior Draughting Officer after completion of probation in the Assistant Draughtsman post in the year 1975 and further, he was senior to the petitioner in the Assistant Draughtsman post, however, he got promotion only on 20.11.1980 only. The said error was occurred due to the improper preparation of the Draughting Officials seniority list. The said improper list was rectified based on the order passed by the Tamil Nadu 7/10 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 Administrative Tribunal, dated 19.06.1991 and the same was also upheld by the order of the Honourable Supreme in the year 1994. Thereafter, the seniority list of Draughting Officials was issued on 24.11.2006, after circulating to the respective candidates. In the above list, the petitioner's name was found place at serial No.455, whereas the promotion was given to those persons were found place from serial Nos.128 to 197 and they were included in the promotion panel to the post of Special Grade Draughting Officer. The petitioner's name was not included in the said seniority list on the ground that the petitioner's seniority was found place at serial No.455. Without challenging the earlier seniority list issued on 24.11.2006, filing the present writ petition for fixing her seniority is not sustainable one. This Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by first respondent, dated 28.03.2012.
9. In view of the above, this Writ Petition sans merit and, accordingly, the same is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Index : Yes/No 03.02.2021 Internet : Yes/No SSL 8/10 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. To The Engineer-in-Chief, WRO & Chief Engineer (General), PWD, Chepauk, Chennai.
9/10 http://www.judis.nic.in W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 M.DHANDAPANI,J.
SSL W.P(MD)No.5484 of 2012 03.02.2021 10/10 http://www.judis.nic.in