Madras High Court
M.Sureshkumar vs The District Collector on 11 October, 2022
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 11.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.13423 & 13425 of 2021
M.Sureshkumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Ramanathapuram District,
Ramanathapuram.
2.The Assistant Director of Town Panchayat,
Office of the Assistant Director of Town Panchayats,
Sivagangai Region,
Sivagangai.
3.The Executive Officer,
Kamuthi Special Grade Town Panchayat,
Kamuthi,
Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, to call for the records relating
to the seniority list dated 01.07.2021 issued by the 3rd respondent, quash the
same and consequently direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as per
the judgment dated 14.07.2017 made in W.A.(MD) No.699 of 2017 on the file
of this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Palpandi
For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jayaseelan
Government Advocate
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.
2. The writ petitioner was appointed as Sweeper in the 3rd respondent
Panchayat on 26.04.2007. He was regularized in the said post on 03.05.2009.
He had completed the pre-foundation course conducted by Madurai Kamaraj
University in the year 2008. Vacancy arose in the promotion post of Health
Supervisor in the year 2010. The writ petitioner was overlooked. Hence, he
filed W.P.(MD)No.13343 of 2010. The said Writ Petition was disposed of on
28.01.2013. Challenging the same, the writ petitioner herein filed W.A.No.699
of 2017. The petitioner was aggrieved that one S.Vinodh Kumar stole a march
over him. The said Vinodh Kumar was impleaded as third respondent. After
hearing the learned counsel on either side, the Hon'ble Division Bench to which
I was a party held that the writ petitioner was very much eligible to be
promoted to the post of Health Supervisor and that he was erroneously
overlooked. Hence, the order impugned in the writ petitioner was quashed and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
the writ appeal was allowed by setting aside the order of the learned Single
Judge and the Executive Officer, Kamuthi Town Panchayat, Kamuthi was
directed to promote the petitioner herein to the post of Health Supervisor. It
was also further directed that he should be placed above the said Vinodh
Kumar. His seniority in the said post will be determined by the employer in
accordance with law. Even though the order of the Hon'ble Division Bench was
passed as early as on 14.07.2017, till date, it has not been complied with. The
stand of the employer is that the writ petitioner declined to receive the order
whereby the direction of the Hon'ble Division Bench was complied with.
3. This stand of the third respondent cannot be believed. No person will
decline to receive an order of promotion. The third respondent is coming out
with a cock and bull story. The petitioner having filed the writ petition and
then the writ appeal would definitely not have said “no” to an order promoting
him as Health Supervisor. Be that as it may, the petitioner could have very
well filed a contempt petition. The petitioner has not done so. Probably, since
more than five years have elapsed, the petitioner could not have filed a
contempt petition after the expiry of the limitation period. That was probably
the reason why the present writ petition has been filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to
3 wanted to justify the stand taken in the counter affidavit. I am not inclined to
consider the same. I posed a simple question to the learned Government
Advocate. I wanted to know if the order dated 14.07.2017 allowing W.A.
(MD)No.699 of 2017 filed by Thiru.M.Suresh Kumar is still holding good or
whether it has been put to challenge before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Obviously,
the review petition has not been filed. The petitioner's counsel also states that
no SLP has been filed.
5. So long as the said order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench is
holding good, it is the duty of the third respondent to comply with the same in
letter and spirit. When the Hon'ble Division Bench had categorically stated that
the petitioner is qualified to be promoted to the post of Health Supervisor, it is
not open to the employer to now take the stand that the petitioner is not
qualified. If the third respondent felt aggrieved, the remedy open to them was
to file SLP before the Hon'ble Apex Court or file a review petition. Such a
course of action was not adopted. I cannot approve the conduct of the third
respondent. It prima facie constitutes contempt. The respondents 2 & 3 are
directed to issue proceedings complying with the order passed by the Hon'ble
Division Bench in W.A.(MD)No.699 of 2017 within 7 days from the date of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
receipt of a copy of this order. I make it clear that if this order is not complied
with, the respondents 2 & 3 will have to face the necessary consequences.
6. The Writ Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
11.10.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
rmi
NOTE:Issue Order Copy on 13.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
rmi
W.P(MD)No.16546 of 2021
11.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
