High CourtsSingle Bench(2012) 02 MAD CK 0348

S. Sukumaran and V.S. Mohamed Sathiq vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras High Court · Decided on 6 February 2012

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vinod K. Sharma, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition No. 5071 of 2007 (O.A. No. 9358 of 2000)

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 361 words

Vinod K. Sharma, J.—The petitioners have approached this Court with a prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash G.O. Ms. No. 125, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 27.05.1999, thereby to set aside the appointment of the third respondent. The petitioners passed SSLC, and joined the service of Thanjavur Municipality. The Government of Tamil Nadu issued an Order dated 12.10.1979, for regularizing the services of the employees, who had completed 10 years of service. The petitioners, having completed 10 years of service, were ordered to be regularized.

2.

The case of the petitioners, is that they were promoted as Junior Assistants, though they were eligible for promotion by virtue of having qualification of SSLC.

3.

The service condition of the petitioners and respondent No. 3 are governed by Rules called the Tamil Nadu Municipality General Service Rules, 1970. The post of Junior Assistant falls under Clause-7 and as per rules, the appointment to the post of Junior Assistant is to be made by direct recruitment or by promotion of category of Record Clerk and Revenue Assistant Grade-II.

4.

The petitioners were not holding the feeder category post for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant, therefore, they have no claim for being promoted to the post, in preference to respondent No. 3, who was appointed by way of direct recruitment.

5.

The impugned order was issued by the State of Tamil Nadu, for regularizing the service of Junior Assistants appointed on NMR basis, who completed 10 years of service.

6.

The respondent No. 3 was appointed as Junior Assistant, having completed 10 years of service with the Government department on NMR basis.

7.

The petitioners have no locus standi to challenge the Government Order of appointment of respondent No. 3, as the petitioners had no right of consideration for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant, being not in the feeder cadre for promotion.

8.

The statutory rules governing the service condition, show that the petitioners were not eligible for being considered for promotion to the post of Junior Assistant. Consequently, finding no merit in this writ petition, it is ordered to be dismissed.