Madras High Court
S.Gomathiammal vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 7 September, 2023
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.09.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN
WP Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
And
W.M.P.No. 8967 of 2017
S.Gomathiammal ... Petitioner in W.P.No. 8210 of 2017
B.Dhansekaran ... Petitioner in W.P.No. 15305 of 2017
-Vs-
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Represented by its Secretary
Revenue Department
Fort St. George
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director of Survey and Land Records
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
... Respondents in both W.Ps.
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
3. The Assistant Director
Survey and Land Records Department
District Collector Complex
Tirunelveli District.
... Respondent in W.P.No. 8210 /2017
4. The Assistant Director
Survey and Land Records Department
District Collector Complex
Villupuram District.
... Respondent in W.P.No. 15305 /2017
PRAYER IN W.P.No. 8210/2017: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling
for the entire records which culminated in issuing the Letter ID No. 23
dated 24.01.2017 on the file of the first respondent, quash the same and
consequently direct the respondents to re-fix the seniority of the petitioner
in the cadre of Assistant in the panel year 1994-1995 by placing her name
above Mrs.K.Rajeswari who was placed in Serial No.1/1994 of the panel,
on the basis of the Judgment rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court on
13.01.2014 in SLP Civil No. 19324 of 2009.
PRAYER IN W.P.No.15305/2017: Writ Petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling
for the entire records which culminated in issuing the Letter ID No. 23
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
dated 24.01.2017 on the file of the first respondent, quash the same in so far
as the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the respondents to re-
fix the seniority of the petitioner in the cadre of Assistant in the panel year
1994-1995 by placing her name above Mrs. V.Pooranavi Malavathi, who
was placed in Serial No.4/1993 of the panel, on the basis of the Judgment
rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court on 13.01.2014 in SLP Civil No.
19324 of 2009.
***
For Petitioner in both W.Ps. : Mr. P.Ganesan
For Respondent in both W.Ps. : Mr. S.Ravi Kumar
Special Government Pleader
COMMON ORDER
Since arguments are advanced in both the Writ Petitions in common
and the facts are also common, a common order is passed.
2. Both the Writ Petitions have been filed in the nature of
Certiorarified Mandamus seeking records relating to a letter 1 D.No. 23
dated 24.01.2017 of the first respondent/ the Secretary, Revenue
Department, Government of Tamil Nadu and quash the same so far as the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
petitioners are concerned and direct the respondents to re-fix the seniority
of the petitioners in the cadre of Assistant in the panel year 1994-1995.
3. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petitions, it had
been stated that both the Writ Petitions had joined as Steno Typist in Survey
and Land Records Department on 04.06.1990 and 13.06.1990 respectively.
Their services were regularised with effect from 04.06.1990. They have
both promoted to the post of Assistant on 13.07.2009. It had been further
stated that the promotion to the post of Assistant came up for consideration
among Junior Assistants and Typist / Steno Typist and the promotion was in
the ratio 4:1 which would mean that for four Junior Assistants, one among
Typist / Steno Typist would be promoted to the post of Assistants. This was
determined by G.O.Ms.No. 224 Personnel and Administrative Reforms
Department dated 08.03.1984. Subsequently, by G.O.Ms.No. 34 Personnel
and Administrative Reforms Department dated 21.02.2001, it was held that
consequent to segregation of posts of Steno Typist and Typiest into two
separate categories, and out of Steno Typist itself since there were three
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
separate scale of Steno Typist Grade - I, Grade -II and Grade - III, the
promotional aspects of Steno Typist Grade - III were very bleak as they
could be promoted only Steno Typist Grade -II and Grade-I and only
thereafter be considered for further promotion as Assistants. Therefore, it
was stated that those who had completed 8 years of service as Steno Typist
Grade - III can also opt for the post of Assistants on transfer.
4. The petitioners herein had given representations to be so
considered. The respondents had granted such promotion as Assistants only
in the year 2009 claiming that they should have completed 8 years as per
G.O.Ms.No. 34, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated
21.02.2001. The petitioners were therefore not included in the panel of the
year 1994-1995.
5. However, the learned counsel for the petitioners now relied on
G.O.Ms.No. 122, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (B) Department,
dated 02.09.2005, wherein the Government, on examining the above issue
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
had reduced the number of years experience for Steno Typist Grade -III to
be also considered to be moved to the post of Assistants from 8 years to 5
years. Placing reliance on that particular fact, the learned counsel therefore
states that the petitioner should have been considered for the panel years
1994-1995.
6. However, this particular stand is very seriously objected to on
behalf of the respondents and it is the contention on behalf of the
respondents that the petitioners would have completed even the period of
five years only in the panel year 1995-1996 and therefore, the relief sought
that they should be considered for the panel year 1994-1995 is
misconceived and should not be granted.
7. However, the impugned order proceeds on the basis of
G.O.Ms.No. 34 Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated
21.02.2001, and had not been taken into consideration G.O.Ms.No. 122,
Personnel and Administrative Reforms (B) Department, dated 02.09.2005,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
reducing the number of experience from 8 years to 5 years. Therefore, to
that extent, the impugned order is set aside.
8. A direction is given to the respondents to reconsider the
representations of the petitioners on the basis of G.O.Ms.No. 122, Personnel
and Administrative Reforms (B) Department, dated 02.09.2005, which had
reduced the number of years of experience as Steno Typist Grade-III to be
moved on transfer or otherwise to the post of Assistants from 8 years to 5
years. If that be the case, the learned counsel for the respondents may
examine this particular issue and issue fresh proceedings. Such proceedings
should be issued within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order and also protect the promotion of the petitioners since
they had suffered as necessary orders had not been passed by taking into
consideration G.O.Ms.No. 122 dated 02.09.2005.
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN,J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
vsg
9. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently,
connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
vsg 07.09.2023
Index:Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
To
1. The Secretary
The Government of Tamil Nadu
Revenue Department
Fort St. George
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director of Survey and Land Records
Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
3. The Assistant Director
Survey and Land Records Department
District Collector Complex
Tirunelveli District.
4. The Assistant Director
Survey and Land Records Department
District Collector Complex
Villupuram District. WP Nos. 8210 & 15305 of 2017
And
W.M.P.No. 8967 of 2017
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
