Madras High Court
T.M.Senthiarasi vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 3 April, 2023
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.6964 of 2023
T.M.Senthiarasi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. By its Principal Secretary,
Health and Family Welfare Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director / Commissioner,
Directorate of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy,
Chennai-600 106.
3.The Principal,
Government Ayurvedha Medical College and Hospital,
Kottar, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
order impugned passed by the first respondent and quash the same as illegal
and devoid of merits and consequently, direct the respondents to confirm and
regularize the petitioner in the post of reader in the Department of
Kaumarabhrtiya in the third respondent's college by considering her lengthy
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/8
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
service in the said post having been appointed pursuant to the proceedings
dated 30.12.2014 under Reference No.2815/E/2014 on the file of the third
respondent with all monetary, attendant and consequential benefits as from the
date of her appointment namely 30.12.2014 forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Sankara Pandian
For Respondents : Mr.K.Balasubramani
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Medical Officer (Ayurveda)
in the Government Primary Health Centre at Muthur, Erode District.
She joined duty on 05.06.2008. She was regularised in the said post
subsequently. When the Government established the third respondent medical
college, the petitioner was sent on deputation to the said college as a teaching
faculty. Pursuant to the direction given by the Madras High Court in W.P.No.
26668 of 2011, dated 23.11.20211, the petitioner was redesignated and
appointed as Lecturer Grade-II in the third respondent college vide G.O.
(Ms)No.12, dated 18.03.2013. The petitioner has been officiating as reader in
the said college since 2014. The petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.10308 of 2020
for confirming and regularising her in the post of reader by considering her
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
representation dated 30.12.2014. The writ petition was disposed of on
28.08.2020 in the following terms:-
“13.Considering the above, this Court is inclined to dispose of this writ
petition with the following direction:
The respondents, especially, the respondents 1 & 2 are hereby directed to
consider the request by way of representation made by the petitioner dated
20.03.2020 and pass orders thereon, by taking into account the aforesaid
discussion, especially in the context of the educational qualification and the
teaching experience gained by the petitioner to hold the post of Reader and
accordingly, pass necessary orders on merits and in accordance with law, within
a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order”
Since the said direction has not been complied with, the petitioner filed Cont.P.
(MD)No.1765 of 2022. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the copy of
the impugned order rejecting the petitioner's request was produced. There upon
the contempt petition came to be closed on 20.01.2003. Challenging the
rejection order, the present writ petition came to be filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reiterated all the
contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and
called upon this Court to set aside the impugned order and grant relief as
prayed for. He drew my attention to G.O.(D).No.1135, Health and Family
Welfare (IM I-1) Department, dated 20.10.2022 issued in favour of one
Dr.J.Clarence Davy. The learned counsel would point out that the said Clarence
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
Davy was directed to be regularly appointed as Principal by relaxing the
relevant statutory rules. The case of the petitioner is that she is also similarly
placed. It is strongly contended that when the Government chose to relax the
rules in favour of certain individuals, denying similar benefit to the petitioner
herein would amount to act of discrimination. The learned counsel would
contend that the conduct of the respondents in rejecting the petitioner's request
is in breach of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
4. I am not persuaded by the said submission of the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner. As rightly pointed out by the learned Special
Government Pleader, the posts in question are covered by Adhoc Rules laid
down in G.O.Ms.No.125, Health and Family Welfare (IMI-1), dated
10.04.2018. The said Adhoc Rules pertain to as many as five posts. They are
as follows:-
(1) Principal
(2) Professor
(3) Reader
(4) Lecturer
(5) Lecturer Grade-II
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
5. It is clear that the post of Lecturer is different from Lecturer Grade-II.
The post of reader has to be filled up by promotion from among the holders of
the post of lecturer in the concerned speciality and only if no qualified person is
available, it has to be filed up by direct recruitment. When the petitioner has
not been sofar regularly appointed as Lecturer, she cannot aspire to be
regularised in the post of reader. That would run contrary to the service rules.
This Court will not be justified in issuing a writ of mandamus. Of-course, in
the case of Dr.J.Clarence Davy and few others, Rule 3 of Adhoc Rules had been
relaxed. Merely because, relaxation was made in favour of Dr.J.Clarence Davy,
the petitioner will not be justified in demanding or insisting that similar
relaxation should be given to her also. No judgment can be anchored on
concession given in favour of another individual. It is for the petitioner to
persuade the authorities to grant similar relaxation. At this stage, the learned
Special Government Pleader would submit that proposal for granting regular
promotion to the post of Lecturer is presently pending. The petitioner can very
well continue in her present position and the Government can pass order on the
said proposal.
6. The first respondent is directed to consider promoting the petitioner as
Lecturer. Once the said process is completed, the Government can very well
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
consider the case of the petitioner for regularizing the petitioner in the post of
reader. All that I am holding is that the statutory scheme set out in the Adhoc
Rules must be borne in mind and scrupulously adhered to. I refrain from
granting any relaxation in the case. I hope that the first respondent would pass
appropriate orders on the pending proposal pertaining to the petitioner in the
light of the observation set out in the order dated 28.08.2020 made in W.P.
(MD)No.10308 of 2020. Exercise of granting regular promotion to the
petitioner for the post of Lecturer will be completed within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is open to the first
respondent to grant the said benefit retrospectively so that her case for
regularization in the post of reader is not affected.
7. With this direction and observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
03.04.2023
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
rmi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
To
1.The Principal Secretary,
Health and Family Welfare Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director / Commissioner,
Directorate of Indian Medicine and Homeopathy,
Chennai-600 106.
3.The Principal,
Government Ayurvedha Medical College and Hospital,
Kottar, Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
rmi
W.P(MD)No.7427 of 2023
03.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
