Madras High Court
M. Ravi vs Y. Divyadarshini on 3 March, 2022
1 W.A.No.452 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.03.2022
Coram
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.A.No.452 of 2022
and CMP.No.3267 of 2022
M. Ravi ... Appellant
-vs-
1. Y. Divyadarshini
2. The Principal Secretary to Government
Commercial Taxes & Registration Department
Fort St.George, Secretariat,
Chennai 600 009.
3. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005. ...
Respondents
Prayer:Writ Appeal is filed under clause 15 of the Letter Patent praying to
set aside the order made in WP No.10154 of 2021 by the order dated
29.11.2021.
For Appellant : Ms.Dakshayani Reddy
For Respondents : Mr.V.Vijay Shankar for R1
Mr.Haja Nazirudeen
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2 W.A.No.452 of 2022
Addl.Advocate General - I
Asst.by Mr.Venkateswaran
Spl.Govt.Pleader (Taxes) for R2 & R3
*****
JUDGMENT
S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
The present appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned
Single Judge made in W.P.No.10154 of 2021 dated 29.11.2021.
2. The appellant is a direct recruit Assistant Commissioner (earlier
Commercial Tax Officer (CTO)) and is presently working as the Joint
Commissioner (ST), VAT & Audit, O/o.The Additional Chief
Secretary/Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Ezhilagam Chepauk,
Chennai - 5. The next avenue of promotion is to the post of Assistant
Commissioner (Commercial Taxes).
The entry level cadre post to the State Services is that of Assistant
Commissioner and the appellant was appointed by a Direct Recruitment by
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) under Group-I Services in
the year 2009 (hereinafter referred to as direct recruit AC (erstwhile CTO)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(Group I Services)).
Even though, the contesting parties are not aggrieved by the direction
of the learned single Judge that the seniority list have got to be published,
the only grievance of the appellant is that, without being influenced by the
order of the learned single Judge the objection have got to be considered and
a decision have got to be taken inasmuch four principles have been laid
down by the Division Bench of this Court and upheld by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in C.A.No.1454 of 1987, to be followed with regard to
fixation of inter-se seniority. The four principles laid down by the Division
Bench of this Court are as under:
"1. Each year should be taken as a unit for fixing the
inter se seniority.
2. Persons not actually appointed in the year 1966
should not be included in 1966 year's list and that seniority
should be determined with reference to the date of their
joining as Joint Commercial Tax Officer; and
3. The date on which an officer commences probation is
the proper criterion for fixing the inter se seniority.
4. If there are vacancies out of the required reservation
of 40% in the permanent cadre of ACTOs for direct recruits,
any appointment made either by transfer or by promotion
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
cannot be utilized to fill up those vacancies. Such
appointments being of a temporary character, whenever
direct recruits are appointed through Public Service
Commission, they being holders of permanent posts by direct
recruitment, they have a right to be appointed to whatever
posts that are taken out of the 40% posts reserved for direct
recruitments."
3. The grievance of the appellant is that the fourth principle would be
given a go by in terms of Para 3 of the counter filed by the State before the
learned Single Judge in W.P.No.10154 of 2021.
4. The learned Additional Advocate General would submit that the
appellant is not at all in the zone of consideration and not entitled to
challenge any portion of the order as there is no adverse finding against the
appellant.
5. Mr.Vijay Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the first
respondent would submit that the leave itself ought not to have been granted
and pursuant to the earlier order of this Court wherein the Court has
observed that the seniority list have got to be finalised and given quietus to.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. Since the case of the appellant/intervenor is that the objection alone
has got to be considered dehors the finding of the learned single Judge
without rendering any finding on merits with regard to the various points
raised by both the parties, including the one whether the appellant is in the
zone of consideration or not, the authorities are expected to take a decision
on the objections made by the parties concerned and independently take a
decision on the said objection for the Draft Seniority and go head with
finalising the final seniority list in accordance with the principles laid down
vide the orders of this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court governing the
issue. In case any other person has not filed any objection, they are expected
to file objection within one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the
order and the Department is expected to communicate it on the notice board.
7. It is represented by the learned Additional Advocate General that
all the categories of the posts for which promotion is going to be considered,
it will be done in a phased manner after taking the objections to the draft
seniority list and it will be finalised.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. With the above observation, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
(S.V.N., J.) (M.S.Q., J.)
03.03.2022
dpq
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
Index: Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
To:
1. The Principal Secretary to Government
Commercial Taxes & Registration Department
Fort St.George, Secretariat,
Chennai 600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk,
Chennai 600 005.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.VAIDYANATHAN, J.
and
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
dpq
W.A.No.452 of 2022
and CMP.No.3267 of 2022
03.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
