Madras High Court
P.Sarkkarai vs Union Of India on 5 January, 2024
Author: R.Suresh Kumar
Bench: R.Suresh Kumar
W.P.No.36237 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.01.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU
W.P.No.36237 of 2023
and W.M.P.No.36231 of 2023
P.Sarkkarai ... Petitioner
-Vs-
1.Union of India
Rep.by the Postmaster General
Western Region (TN), Coimbatore-641 002.
2.Superintendent of Post Offices
Pollachi Division, Pollachi-642 001. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the
issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the order dated
02.02.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench in
O.A.No.957/2015 and to quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Purushothaman
for Mr.K.Kathiresan
For Respondents : Mr.V.Balasubramanian
Senior Panel Counsel - for R1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P.No.36237 of 2023
JUDGMENT
(Order of the Court was made by K.KUMARESH BABU, J.)
The writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Central
Administrative Tribunal (CAT), rejecting the claim of the petitioner to promote him in
the cadre of Postman.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who would submit that the
petitioner was appointed as Gram Dak Sevak (GDS) and had put in five years of
service as GDS. Originally a notification was issued by the respondents for filling up
the vacancies in the Pollachi Division by a notification dated 05.02.2013, which was
followed by a further notification dated 05.03.2013. He would further submit that,
as per the said notification, out of the total 4 vacancies, the break up of vacancies
was given as 2 for Unreserved (UR), 1 for Other Backward Classes (OBC) and 1 for
Scheduled Caste (SC).
3. The petitioner also participated in the examination, however he was not
selected. Thereafter, under the Right to Information Act, he had been informed that
there has been no vacancy for SC as it has been modified by an announcement
dated 22.04.2013. Therefore, he had approached the Central Administrative
Tribunal seeking for appropriate relief. He would contend that the Tribunal, without
taking into consideration the material facts had held that, the petitioner had not
impleaded the necessary parties viz., the persons who have been appointed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
pursuant to the said notification and without challenging the same, the petitioner
would not be entitled for the relief that has been prayed for.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that, the
notification dated 22.04.2013 modifying the reservation had not been published for
him to challenge the same, for which he cannot be held responsible and therefore he
would seek the interference of this Court in the order passed by the CAT and seeks
to grant him promotion to the post of Postman.
5. We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner and have perused the materials placed on record.
6. Originally, a notification had come to be issued on 05.02.2013 calling for
applications from eligible candidates working as MTS and GDS, followed by an
announcement dated 05.03.2013 intimating the vacancy position in respect of both
the categories. The petitioner falls under GDS category, for which totally 4
vacancies were announced and the break up of the vacancies was given as 2 for
Unreserved (UR), 1 for Other Backward Classes (OBC) and 1 for Scheduled Caste
(SC). However, by a subsequent notification dated 22.04.2013, the vacancy position
had been modified and in respect of Pollachi Division, for GDS category, out of the
total vacancies, 2 vacancies were earmarked for Unreserved (UR) and 2 vacancies
were earmarked for OBC.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7. The petitioner had not challenged the said subsequent notification dated
22.04.2013. Even assuming that he was not aware of the same, from the counter
affidavit filed by the respondents as early as in the year 2014, the same has been
espoused. Even after that, the petitioner has not chosen to challenge the
subsequent notification and had proceeded to contest the original application filed by
him as such. The Tribunal had not only rejected the claim of the petitioner on the
basis that the necessary parties have not been added as parties, but had also
examined the merits of the claim made by the petitioner and, having considered that
there was no vacancy for the SC category, rejected the claim.
8. In such event, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed
by the Tribunal and in fine, the writ petition fails and it is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
(R.S.K.,J.) (K.B.,J.)
05.01.2024
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
KST
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Postmaster General
Western Region (TN), Coimbatore-641 002.
2.Superintendent of Post Offices
Pollachi Division, Pollachi-642 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
and
K.KUMARESH BABU, J.
KST
W.P.36237 of 2023
05.01.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
