Madras High Court
A.Jawahar Ali ... Writ vs The Principal Secretary on 24 September, 2021
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :24.09.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. BHARATHIDASAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN
W.A.(MD)No.1365 of 2011
A.Jawahar Ali ... Writ Petitioner/Appellant
-vs-
1.The Principal Secretary,
Commercial Taxes & Registration Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Ezhilagam,
Chepauk,
Chennai-600 005.
3.B.Devendhiraboopathy
4.P.Sitrarasu ... Respondents
(Respondents 3 & 4 impleaded as party respondents vide
Court order dated 21.08.2013 made in M.P(MD)No.1 of 2013 by
NPVJ & PDSJ)
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
PRAYER : Writ Appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of the Letters
Patent, against the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.573 of 2010 dated
14.10.2011.
For Petitioner : Mr.Mohammad Imran
for M/s.Ajmal Associates
For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.R.Ragavendharan
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by V.BHARATHIDASAN,J.)
This Writ Appeal has been filed against the order dated 14.10.2011
passed in W.P.(MD)No.573 of 2010 dismissing the petitioner's writ petition.
2. The writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by
the Principal Secretary, Commercial Taxes and Registration Department,
Chennai, rejecting the request of the appellant/writ petitioner to promote
him to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes
(formerly known as Commercial Tax Officer). According to the appellant,
he was working as Deputy Commercial Tax Officer, and he is eligible to
promote as Assistant Commissioner for the year 2006-2007. The appellant's
promotion has been denied on the ground that he had not passed the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
Account Test for the Executive Officers, which is one of the pre-requisite
qualifications for promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes.
3. The contention of for the appellant/writ petitioner is that, even
though the appellant had not passed the Account Test for Executive
Officers, he has passed the Account Test for Subordinate Officers Part-I and
Part-II and it was equivalent to that of pass in the Account Test for
Executive Officers. Hence, the appellant is also eligible for promotion to
the post of Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. On that ground,
he has challenged the order passed rejecting his request seeking promotion.
4.The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the
ground that even though pass in the Account Test for Subordinate Officers
Part-I and Part-II is equivalent to pass in the Account Test for Executive
Officers, the Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes Services Rules, prescribes the
qualification for the promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes, as pass in the Account Test for Executive Officers,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
unless the said Rule is suitably amended, the writ petitioner cannot claim
that both the qualifications are equal. Now, challenging the said order, the
present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant/writ petitioner.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would contend
that, in the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, it has been
specifically admitted that the pass in Account test for Subordinate Officers
Part -1 and Part – II, is equivalent to that of pass in Account Test for
Executive Officers, hence his promotion cannot be rejected on the ground
that, he has not cleared the Account Test for Executive Officers.
He would further submit that some of the similarly placed officials like the
appellant, who have passed the Account Test for Subordinate Officers Part-I
and Part-II, were given promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner of
Commercial Taxes and that benefit should be necessarily extended to the
appellant/writ petitioner. Merely because the Rule is not amended, the
appellant's right to get promotion cannot be denied.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents
1 and 2 would submit that, Special Rule 4 r/w Rule 1-A of the Annexure to
the Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes Services Rules, prescribes the
qualification for the promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner as
“must have passed in the Account Test for Executive Officers”. Admittedly,
the appellant did not pass the Account Test for Executive Officers and
therefore, his claim cannot be considered.
7. We have considered the rival submissions made on either side and
perused the materials available on record.
8.The Special Rule 4 r/w Rule 1-A, of the Annexure to the Tamil
Nadu Commercial Taxes Services Rules, prescribes the qualification for the
promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner as follows:
“1-A Recruitment by Transfer from (i)Must have passed -
Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes (a)The Account Test for
Sub-ordinate Service. Executive Officer
(b) Departmental Test in
Commercial Taxes Acts
Parts I, II and III.
(c) Book-keeping.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
9. As on today, the said Rule is not amended and the appellant did not
possess the qualification as he has not passed the Account Test for
Executive Officers, merely because the appellant has passed the Account
Test for Subordinate Officers Part -I and Part – II, which is said to be
equivalent to that of pass in the Account Test for Executive Officers, the
appellant cannot claim promotion till the said Rule is suitably amended.
The learned Single Judge considering the same has rightly dismissed the
writ petition. We find no irregularity or infirmity in that order and hence,
we find no merit in the appeal and the writ appeal is liable to be dismissed.
10. In the result, the writ appeal is dismissed. No Costs.
[V.B.D.,J.] [R.P.A.,J.]
24.09.2021
pm
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
To
1.The Principal Secretary,
Commercial Taxes & Registration Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Ezhilaga,.
Chepauk.
Chennai-600 005
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.1365 of 2021
V.BHARATHIDASAN, J.
and
R.PONGIAPPAN, J.
pm
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A.(MD)No.1365 of 2011
24.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
