Madras High Court
R. Thirupathi vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 6 October, 2023
2023/MHC/4553
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 06.10.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
R. Thirupathi,
Assistant (Accountant),
Madurai East Panchayat Union,
Chokkikulam,
Madurai – 2.
(Now working as Assistant / Rural Welfare Officer Grade I)
Madurai West Panchayat Union,
Chokkikulam,
Madurai – 625 002. ... Appellant /Petitioner
in W.A.(MD) No.670 of 2022
P. Kumaravel,
Assistant,
Thirumangalam Panchayat Union Office,
Thirumangalam,
Madurai. ... Appellant /Petitioner
in W.A.(MD) No.671 of 2022
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Secretary to the Government,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai - 2.
2. The Director,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department,
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
Panagal Maligai,
Saidapet,
Chennai - 15.
3. The District Collector,
Madurai District,
Madurai. ..Respondents 1 to 3 in both the
Writ Appeals
4. The Block Development Officer,
Madurai East Panchayat Union,
China Chokkikulam,
Madurai. ... 4 th Respondent in W.A.(MD)
No.670 of 2022
4. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat),
O/o. The Block Development Office,
Thirumangalam Panchayat Union Office,
Thirumangalam,
Madurai. .. 4 th Respondent in W.A.(MD)
No.671 of 2022
COMMON PRAYER:- Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters
Patent Act, to set aside the common order dated 04.01.2022 made in W.P.
(MD)Nos.3810 and 3813 of 2021 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant in both : Mr.J.Barathan
the Writ Appeals
For Respondents : Mr.Veera Kathiravan
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by Mr.N.Satheeskumar
Additional Government Pleader
****
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
The present intra-Court appeals have been instituted
challenging the common order dated 04.01.2022 passed in W.P.(MD)Nos.
3810 and 3813 of 2021.
2. The appellants were intially appointed as Panchayat Clerks
on 01.08.1980. A charge memo was issued against them with reference to
certain allegations on 09.02.2005. The appellants filed W.P.(MD) No.966
of 2005 challenging the charge memo and this Hon'ble Court allowed the
Writ Petition quashing the charge memorandum dated 09.02.2005. The
third respondent published the Seniority List of Village Assistants on
05.06.2006, wherein the name of the appellants were placed in Serial
Nos.31 and 32.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants mainly contended that the
appellants were eligible for appointment by way of transfer of service to
the post of Junior Assistant in the panel of the year 2005 – 2006. Since
the charge memorandum issued against the appellants were quashed by
this Court and there was no impediment to consider the names of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
appellants to the post of Junior Assistant, the respondents have granted
appointments belatedly and therefore, the appellants submitted
representations to restore their seniority on par with their juniors in the
post of Village Assistant and consequently, grant appointment with
retrospective effect along with all consequential monetary benefits with
effect from 10.03.2008, the date on which the juniors to the appellants
were appointed as Junior Assistants.
4. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the
State raised an objection by stating that the post of Village Assistant is
falling under Local Authority under Panchayat Service Rules. The post of
Junior Assistant is falling under the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service
Rules within the purview of Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission.
Thus, concurrence of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission is
mandatory for the purpose of appointing a Village Assistant as Junior
Assistant under the Tamil Nadu Miniserial Service Rules. Therefore, it is
a selection post to be made by way of transfer of service and the
contention of the petitioner that the seniority alone is to be followed is
incorrect. The Government passed an order in G.O.Ms.No.240 Rural
Development Department, dated 07.09.2000, wherein conditions were
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
stipulated for the selection of Panchayat Assistant for appointment to the
post of Junior Assistant by way of transfer of service. As per para 5(c)
and (d) the previous conduct and andecetent are to be taken into
consideration for the purpose of inclusion of their names in the approved
pannel for appointment to the post of Junior Assistant by way of transfer
of service. Thus, it is not a promotional post, but a selection post.
Therefore, merit cum seniority is to be followed. Assesment of conduct is
a paramount importance since it is an appointment to be made with the
concurrence of the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission into the
Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service.
5. We have considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties to the lis on hand.
6. It is not in dispute that appellants were appointed as Village
Assistants under the Panchayat Service Rules. Appointment to the post of
Junior Assistant is to be made with the concurrence the Tamil Nadu
Public Service Commission and in compliance of the guidelines issued
by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.240 dated 07.09.2000. The names of
the appellants were included in the list of seniority of Village Assistants
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
but their names were not considered in the pannel for the years 2005 –
2006 and 2006 – 2007 on account of the merit assessment made by the
competent authority. The merit assessment regarding the previous
conduct and antecedents were taken into consideration by the competent
authorities and accordingly, the case of the appellants were deferred.
However, the appellants were subsequently considered and included in
the panel of the year 2007 – 2008. Consequently, the appellants were
appointed as Junior Assistant on 04.08.2011.
7. Interestingly, the appellants have not approached this Court
within a reasonable time. Though the appellants were promoted in the
year 2011, the Writ Petitions are filed in the year 2018 after a lapse of
about six years from the date of promotion. There was an enormous delay
in approaching the High Court and the learned Single Judge considered
this ground for the purpose of rejecting the claim of the appellants to
grant retrospective promotion to the post of Junior Assitant.
8. Appointment cannot be claimed as an absolute right.
Appointment by Transfer of Service are to be made strictly in accordance
with the terms and conditions stipulated in the Service Rules. Post of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
Junior Assistant is falling under the purview of the Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission and concurrence of the Commission is mandatory.
In the present case, the merit assessment was made. Previous conduct and
antecendent of the appellants were considered and accordingly their case
was deferred initially in the panel of the years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007
and thereafter, the names of the appellants were considered and included
in the panel of the year 2007 – 2008 and consequently, promotion order
was passed in the year 2011. That being the factum, we do not find any
reason to interfere with the findings made by the learned Single Judge,
which is in consonance with the Government Orders and principles to be
adopted for the purpose of appointing the Panchayat Service personnel to
the Ministerial Service, by way of transfer of service.
9. In view of the same, the common order dated 04.01.2022
passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)Nos.3810 and 3813 of
2021) stands confirmed and the Writ Appeals are dismissed. No costs.
[S.M.S.J.,] & [V.L.N.J.,]
NCC :Yes/No 06.10.2023
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
SJ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
SJ
To
1. The Secretary to the Government,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Secretariat,
Chennai - 2.
2. The Director,
Rural Development & Panchayat Raj Department,
Panagal Maligai,
Saidapet,
Chennai - 15.
3. The District Collector,
Madurai District,
Madurai.
4. The Block Development Officer,
Madurai East Panchayat Union,
China Chokkikulam,
Madurai.
5. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayat),
O/o. The Block Development Office,
Thirumangalam Panchayat Union Office,
Thirumangalam,
Madurai.
W.A.(MD)Nos.670 and 671 of 2022
06.10.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
