Madras High Court
C.Thangarajan vs The District Collector on 25 February, 2021
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 25.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.KANNAMMAL
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
C.Thangarajan ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Block Development Officer,
Thiruvattar Panchayat Union,
Thiruvattar,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set
aside the order, dated 11.09.2017 made in W.P(MD)No.17094 of 2017
on the file of this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.A.Balakrishnan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Mahendran
Additional Government Pleader
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/6
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.)
The Writ Appeal is directed against the order passed by the
learned Single Judge in W.P(MD)No.17094 of 2017, dated 11.09.2017,
wherein, the appellant/writ petitioner had sought for a Mandamus,
directing the first respondent to promote him as Block Development
Officer notionally by fixing his seniority above his juniors and disburse
the respective benefits to him.
2.The appellant was serving as an Extension Officer at
Thiruvattar Panchayat Union. During the year 1999, he had indulged in
a criminal case on the file of the Suchindram Police Station in Crime
No.504 of 1999, which culminated into S.C.No.241 of 1999, on the file
of the Assistant Sessions Court, Padmanabhapuram, in which, he was
convicted along with others and sentenced to undergo seven years
rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs.1,000/-. In view of the
above conviction, the first respondent/District Collector had passed an
order of suspension and the appellant was dismissed from service on
13.07.2006. In the meanwhile, the appellant had preferred an appeal
in Crl.A.No.73 of 2006 before the Sessions Court, Mahila Court,
Nagercoil, which was allowed on the basis of 'benefit of doubt' on
17.05.2016.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
3.In view of the order of acquittal, the first respondent had
revoked the order of suspension and also the dismissal order. The
appellant was also permitted for deemed retirement on attaining the
age of superannuation on 31.03.2006 retrospectively. The appellant
was also involved in a vigilance case, wherein, he was charged with
Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal)
Rules, by the first respondent in proceedings, dated 09.08.1996 in
connection with the demand and acceptance of bribe from
beneficiaries of Integrated Rural Development Project (IRDP). In view
of the same, the appellant was also imposed with a punishment of
reduction in rank ie., from Extension Officer to Rural Welfare Office
Grade-I, for a period of three years and on restoration, increment
shall be postponed with cumulative effect to the extent that he was
downgraded to the post of Rural Welfare Officer Grade-I. The
reversion from the post of Extension Officer to Rural Welfare Officer
Grade-I was issued on 05.02.2003 and the appellant has also joined
duty in the reverted post on 14.02.2003. After completion of three
years, he was re-promoted to the post of Extension Officer on
17.02.2006 and the appellant had joined duty on 20.02.2006.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
4.It is also further stated that on restoration of reversion, the
appellant's increment cut ordered in the Government Order was
effective for three years i.e, till 31.03.2006, which is the date of his
superannuation.
5.Admittedly, the appellant had not filed any appeal against the
said punishment. While so, an acquittal order was passed in favour of
the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.73 of 2006 on 17.05.2016. On the
strength of the acquittal order, the first respondent had passed an
order on 29.09.2016, setting aside the order of dismissal on
30.09.2016 and permitted the appellant to retire retrospectively from
31.03.2006. Now, the appellant is seeking promotion as Block
Development Officer notionally by fixing his seniority.
6.It is pointedly argued by the learned Additional Government
Pleader that the appellant was undergoing major punishment of
reversion and again on restoration of the increment cut, he had also
suffered yet another punishment as per order, dated 13.12.2005. It is
also not in dispute that both the punishments were in force, till the
date of superannuation of the appellant on 31.03.2006.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
7.The learned Single Judge has specifically found that in view of
the above facts, the appellant is not entitled to ask for promotion on
par with his juniors, when he had already attained the age of
superannuation as early as on 31.03.2006 based on the order of
acquittal and after a passage of 10 years, he cannot demand for a
promotion. As mentioned supra, the appellant had suffered two other
punishment, which was in force till his age of retirement.
8.In the light of the above, the appellant has no legal right to
seek promotion on par with his juniors, after 10 years. Therefore, we
find no merits in the Writ Appeal to interfere with the order passed by
the learned Single Judge and the same is confirmed and the Writ
Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
[P.S.N.,J] [S.K.,J.]
25.02.2021
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
ps
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.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.
and
S.KANNAMMAL,J.
ps
To
1.The District Collector,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Block Development Officer,
Thiruvattar Panchayat Union,
Thiruvattar,
Kanyakumari District.
W.A(MD)No.1464 of 2017
25.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
