Madras High Court
A.Kaliappan vs The District Educational Officer on 1 July, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 01.07.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
A.Kaliappan ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Educational Officer,
Karur Educational District,
Karur.
2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,
Thanthoni Assistant Education Officer,
Karur District,
Karur. ... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the common
order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.13652 of 2017, dated 26.07.2017.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Titus
For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran
Standing Counsel for Government
*****
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
This Writ Appeal filed by the writ petitioner is directed against the
order dated 26.07.2017, in W.P.(MD) No.13652 of 2017, in which the appellant
challenged the order passed by the first respondent dated 19.04.2017, rejecting
the representation given by him on 09.05.2016, seeking notional promotion to
the post of Record Clerk from 09.08.1995 and to grant all benefits therefrom.
The learned Writ Court dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that it is
haplessly barred by limitation. The correctness of the same is challenged by way
of filing this Writ Appeal.
2.It is pointed out by Mr.S.Titus, the learned counsel for the appellant
that on account of the mistake committed by a person in not passing appropriate
orders at the appropriate time, the appellant's right to get promotion has been
grossly affected. In this regard, a reference has been made to the proceedings of
the District Educational Officer dated 23.02.1996, proposal of the District
Educational Officer dated 24.02.2003, the information secured by the appellant
under the Right to Information Act, 2002 dated 30.10.2006 and the
communication sent by the District Educational Officer, dated 14.02.2007.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
3.The learned counsel for the appellant would further submit that
these proceedings will clearly show that for no fault committed by the appellant,
he was not included in the panel of candidates fit for promotion and he was
unable to get promotion at the appropriate time. Therefore, the appellant
submitted a representation dated 09.05.2016 to the respondents and since the
representation was not considered, the appellant approached this Court and filed
W.P.(MD) No.24816 of 2016, to direct the respondent to consider the
representation, which was disposed by of on 17.03.2017, after which, the order
impugned in the Writ Petition was passed. It is submitted that in the said order a
totally new stand was taken, which was never the case of the department at the
earlier point of time. However, without considering the same, the learned Writ
Court has dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground of delay and laches.
4.After elaborately hearing the learned counsels, we are of the
considered view that the appellant's attempt was to reopen the matter, which has
attained finality. The claim for securing promotion has to be done at the
appropriate and the person who has not done the same cannot be permitted to
say that even after 15 years of his retirement, he is entitled to pursue his claim.
As rightly submitted by Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel for
Government that for the communications, which were referred to by the learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
counsel for the petitioner, copies have been marked and sent to the appellant,
but at the earlier point of time, he has not stated that as a matter of right he is
entitled for promotion.
5.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Writ
Petition ought not to have rejected on the ground of delay and laches since there
was a direction issued by the Court to consider the representation on
19.04.2017, after which, the order stand passed. In our considered view, the
order and direction issued in W.P.(MD) No.24816 of 2016 dated 17.03.2017
cannot set the clock back and it cannot cure the defect of inordinate delay and
laches. In fact, by issuing such innocuous directions, some times stale claims
are reopened. The present case is a classic example, where the appellant now
seeks to contend that the cause of action arose only after the order dated
17.03.2017, in W.P.(MD) No.24816 of 2016. The contention advanced by the
appellant cannot be accepted because a direction issued to consider the
representation will not revive the claim, which has come to an end on and after
the retirement of the appellant on attaining the age of superannuation on
31.05.2021. Thus, it is clear that during period the appellant was in service he
has not approached the appropriate forum stating that he has been unjustifiably
denied promotion. Even after retirement in 2001, the appellant did not make a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
claim. But 15 years after retirement, he made a representation to the respondents
on 09.05.2016 and immediately filed a Writ Petition on 15.12.2016, wherein an
order was passed to consider the representation. Thus, all the above reasons
clearly show that the claim made by the appellant is haplessly barred by
limitation.
6.It is submitted that for the first time, a different stand has been taken
in the impugned order dated 19.04.2017. This submission is not tenable because
at any earlier point of time no adverse order was passed against the appellant,
but his name did not find place in the list of candidates eligible to the
promotion. In the order impugned in the Writ Petition, the department has
disclosed the reasons. We find that there is absolutely no reason to interfere
with the same. In any event, the appellant cannot reopen a matter which was
settled before three decades. The appellant has not made out a case to interfere
with the order passed in the Writ Petition.
7.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
Index :Yes/No [T.S.S., J.] [S.A.I., J.]
Internet :Yes/No 01.07.2021
sj
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
sj
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
1.The District Educational Officer,
Karur Educational District,
Karur.
2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,
Thanthoni Assistant Education Officer,
Karur District,
Karur.
W.A.(MD)No.319 of 2018
01.07.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
