Madras High Court
Union Of India vs Page 1 Of 19 on 23 June, 2025
Author: J. Nisha Banu
Bench: J. Nisha Banu
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 23-06-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
C.M.P.Nos.18393, 18391 & 18384 of 2022
W.A.No.2393 of 2022:
1.Union Of India
Represented by Government of Puducherry,
Chief secretariat, Puducherry 605 001.
2.The Chairman
DPC-(Non Teaching Staff),
PEC-cum-Secretary to Government (Education),
Chief secretariat, Government of Puducherry,
Puducherry 605 001
3.The Secretary to Government
Department of Personnel and Administrative
Reforms, (Personnel Wing), Chief Secretariat,
Government of Puducherry, Puducherry 605 001
4.The Principal
Pondicherry Engineering College (P.E.C),
Pillaichavady, Puducherry 605 014
Appellant(s)
Vs
Page 1 of 19
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
1. M.Issaivanan
S/O. (Late) K.Maduraimuthu,
No.14, Mariamman Koil Street, Kalathumadu,
Vinobanagar, Pondicherry 605 008
2.G.Murugesan,
Superintendent (Ad-hoc), Pondicherry Engineering College,
Pillaichavady, Pondicherry-605 014.
3.R.Govindarajan (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
4.E.Mourougayane (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
5.L.Manjini (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
6.P.Parasuraman (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
7.S.Vengadesaperumal (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
8.N.Ramalingam (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
9.M.Ilangovan (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
Page 2 of 19
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
10.S.Murthy (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
11.J.Govindarajulu (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
12.M.Tamilselvam (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
Respondent(s)
W.A.No.2394 of 2022:
1.The Chairman-cum-Secretary to Government
(Education), Staff Selection (Non-Teaching)
Committee, Puducherry Engineering College,
Puducherry 605 014.
2.The Principal
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Puducherry 605 014
Appellant(s)
Vs
M.Issaivanan,
S/O. (Late) K.Maduraimuthu,
No.14, Mariamman Koil Street, Kalathumadu,
Vinobanagar, Pondicherry 605 008
Respondent(s)
Page 3 of 19
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
W.A.No.2395 of 2022:
1.The Chairman-cum-Secretary to Government
(Education), Staff Selection (Non-Teaching)
Committee, Puducherry Engineering College,
Puducherry 605 001.
2.The Secretary to Government
Department of Personnel and Administrative
Reforms, (Personnel Wing), Chief Secretariat,
Government of Puducherry, Puducherry 605 001
3.The Principal
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Puducherry 605 014
Appellant(s)
Vs
1. M.Issaivanan
S/O. (Late) K.Maduraimuthu,
No.14, Mariamman Koil Street, Kalathumadu,
Vinobanagar, Pondicherry 605 008
2.G.Murugesan,
Superintendent (Ad-hoc), Pondicherry Engineering College,
Pillaichavady, Pondicherry-605 014.
3.R.Govindarajan (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
4.E.Mourougayane (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
Page 4 of 19
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
5.L.Manjini (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
6.P.Parasuraman (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
7.S.Vengadesaperumal (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
8.N.Ramalingam (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
9.M.Ilangovan (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
10.S.Murthy (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
11.J.Govindarajulu (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
12.M.Tamilselvam (Assistant)
Pondicherry Engineering College, Pillaichavady,
Pondicherry-605 014.
Respondent(s)
Page 5 of 19
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
Prayer in W.P.No.2393 of 2022:
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent to set aside the
order dated 05.10.2021 passed in W.P.No.33089 of 2013 on the file of this
Court.
Prayer in W.P.No.2394 of 2022:
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent to set aside the
order dated 05.10.2021 passed in W.P.No.28484 of 2014 on the file of this
Court.
Prayer in W.P.No.2395 of 2022:
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent to set aside the
order dated 05.10.2021 passed in W.P.No.33301 of 2014 on the file of this
Court.
For Appellant(s)
in all cases: Mr.R.Syed Mustafa
Special Government Pleader
(Puducherry)
For R1 in all cases: Mr.D.Sreenivasan
JUDGMENT
(Made by M.Jothiraman J.)
Intra-court appeals have been preferred challenging the common
order dated 05.10.2021 passed in W.P.Nos.33089 of 2013, 28484 & 33301
of 2014.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
2. The writ petitioner viz. Issaivanan was originally engaged as a
daily rated NMR in Pondicherry Engineering College with effect from
01.11.1984 and he was regularized as Helper with effect from 01.08.1987
and promoted as Attender with effect from 14.02.1994. Thereafter, he was
promoted as Lower Division Clerk (LDC) with effect from 23.05.1996 and
Upper Division Clerk (UDC) with effect from 31.10.2001 and Assistant
with effect from 23.02.2006.
3. The writ petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petitions for the
following reliefs:
W.P.No.33089 of 2013:
“for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to
call for the records relating to Lr.No.PEC/Estt./E7/2013/2608
dated 06.08.2013 issued by the 4th respondent and quash the
same and further direct the 4th respondent to pay the arrears
for the period from 16.02.2006 to 08.12.2009 and to issue
revised order promoting the petitioner with effect from
16.02.2006 instead of 23.02.2006 based on the decision of the
DPC meeting held on 09.12.2009.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
W.P.No.28484 of 2014:
“for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd
respondent to act on the counter affidavit dated 06.10.2010
(Para 17(b) and (c)] filed by them in WP No.38340/2006.”
W.P.No.33301 of 2014:
“for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the
respondents to revise the seniority list dated 21.02.2011 in
Lr.No.PEC/Estt/E4/Seniority/2010/671.”
4. The writ petitioner had filed a writ petition in W.P.No.38340 of
2006 to promote him as UDC retrospectively with effect from 06.07.2000.
According to the writ petitioner, he was not given retrospective promotion
as LDC with effect from 25.06.1993 and UDC with effect from 23.05.2001.
Therefore, he has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.28484 of 2014 for
implementation of promotion as per the counter affidavit dated 06.10.2020
filed in W.P.No.38340 of 2006.
5. This Court, by a common order dated 05.10.2021, has observed
as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
“20.From a simple perusal of the seniority list dated
21.02.2011, it is seen that even though the petitioner was
promoted with effect from 23.02.2006, his date of promotion
was shown as 09.12.2009. Had he been promoted notionally
with effect from 16.02.2006, he would not have been ranked
below the said G.Murugesan and would have been filled at
seventh roster point in the roster of seniority. As per the roster
point, seventh point goes to Scheduled Caste category. In that
event, the petitioner by following the rule of reservation would
have got promotion earlier than G.Murugesan.
21.Therefore, considering the totality of the
circumstances and the failure on the part of the respondents
and also the considering the factum that inasmuch as the
Government has ignored the length of service of the
candidates and departed from the principle of seniority of
candidates who served in the same cadre while drawing up of
the list of eligible candidates, and that it has committed a
mistake that needs to be corrected, a direction is given to the
official respondents to ratify the mistakes and accord
promotion to the petitioner taking into account his date of
promotion as Attender as 01.08.1987 and LDC with effect
from 25.06.1993 and further promotions on par with his
juniors and revise the seniority at all levels on par with his
immediate junior G.Murugesan and consequently, promote
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
him on par with his junior G.Murugesan and disburse all
other attendant and monetary benefits in accordance with law
within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a
copy of this order.”
6. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, these writ
appeals have been filed by the appellants herein.
7. The learned Special Government Pleader (Puducherry)
appearing for the appellants would submit that with regard to the claim
made by the writ petitioner that he has been promoted with effect from
25.03.1993 by relaxing typewriting test is not acceptable, since the said
issue has attained finality in the earlier round of litigation initiated by the
writ petitioner in W.P.No.38340 of 2006, in which, a learned Single Judge,
by order dated 12.03.2012, rejected his claim. He would further submit that
the promotion of writ petitioner to the post of LDC in the year 1993 was by
way of Limited Department Competitive Examination (LDCE) and not
promotion by seniority and that the writ petitioner participated in LDCE,
scored 9/100 as against the reserved slot and failed. Therefore, the writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
petitioner suppressed the above material facts by misleading the Court and
got an order in his favour. Further, he would submit that the qualification of
a junior viz. G.Murugesan and his marching over the writ petitioner was by
the process of merit through the method of LDCE and not by virtue of
seniority. Therefore, the seniority impugned in the writ petition was in
commence with the recruitment rules and regulations governing the
principle of seniority and as well as taking into account the date of
appointment in every feeder cadre.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the writ
petitioner would submit that the writ petitioner had joined as NMR on
01.10.1984 and regularized as Helper [Group-D] with effect from
01.08.1987. He would further submit that the writ petitioner was not
recategorized/promoted even though 21 Helpers, who were junior to him
were recategorized/promoted as Attender retrospectively and at that point of
time, there were no recruitment rules for the post of Attender [Group-D] and
the writ petitioner was the only Scheduled Caste candidate holding the post
of Helper. He would also submit that out of 21 persons, 12 persons who
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
were holding the post of Attender were promoted as LDC with effect from
25.06.1993 and after promoting them, Pondicherry Engineering College
issued a Circular dated 19.08.1993 stating that the governing body had
decided to modify the recruitment rules for the post of LDC for conducting
LDCE. He would further submit that Pondicherry Engineering College
issued an Office Order dated 09.02.2001 by giving retrospective promotion
to the writ petitioner to the post of Attender with effect from 01.08.1987
with consequential benefits and it has come out with a new seniority list of
Attenders dated 18.08.2021, wherein, the writ petitioner was shown as the
senior most person in Sl.No.1 and the said G.Murugesan at Sl.No.7. Further,
he would submit that therefore, by virtue of seniority, he had been entitled
to get promotion to the higher post and as per the roster point, seventh point
goes to the Scheduled Caste category and in the event of following the rule
of reservation, the writ petitioner would have got promotion earlier to
G.Murugesan. He would therefore submit that the common order passed by
the learned Single Judge is well reasoned and there is no infirmity to
interfere with the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
9. We have considered the submissions made the learned counsel
on either side and perused the materials available on record.
10. It is not in dispute that the writ petitioner was appointed as a
daily rated employee on 01.11.1984 and he was appointed as Helper on
01.08.1987 and thereafter, he was confirmed in the post of Helper on
14.09.1987 and he was promoted as Attender on 14.02.1994; he was
promoted as LDC on 23.05.1994 with a condition to qualify typewriting
examination within a period of two years, failing which, his promotion will
be reverted, pursuant to which, he has completed the same; thereafter, he
was retrospectively and notionally promoted as UDC with effect from
31.10.2001 and substantially with effect from 11.09.2006. It is also not in
dispute that the writ petitioner was promoted as Assistant with effect from
23.02.2006 and substantially with effect from 09.12.2009. Pondicherry
Engineering College, Pondicherry, issued an office order dated 18.09.2006
in Estt/E4/2006/No.895, which reads as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
“PONDICHERRY INGINEERING COLLEGE
PONDICHERRY
.../Estt/E4/2006/No.895 18.09.2006
OFFICE ORDER
Sub: PEC – Issue of revised order – Reg.
Ref: This college O/O No.PEC/Estt/E.4/2006/4699
dated 11.09.2006
In accordance with the recommendation of the review
DPC (N.T) meeting held on 10.08.2006, Thiru.M.Issaivanan
UDC is deemed to be promoted as UDC notionally with effect
from 31.10.2001 and substantially with effect from
11.09.2006.”
11. It is seen from the typed set of papers that the writ petitioner
had preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.38340 of 2006 seeking for the
following relief:
“To issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for
the records in connected with the proceedings issued in
PEC/Estt/E4/2006 No.895 dated 18.09.2006 passed by the
second respondent and quash the same and consequently
direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Upper
Division Clerk retrospectively from 06.07.2000.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
The said writ petition was disposed of on 12.03.2012 with the following
observation:
“2. The only grievance of the petitioner is that even
though, he was given notional promotion from 31.10.2001, he
ought to have been given the promotion with effect from
06.07.2000. But, on a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen
that n the review Departmental Promotion Committee (Non-
Teaching Staff) meeting held on 10.08.2006, the petitioner is
stated to be deemed to be promoted as Upper Division Clerk
notionally with effect from 31.10.2001 and substantially with
effect from 11.09.2006. Therefore, the Office Order clearly
specifies the date of notional promotion along with the date of
substantial posting also. Therefore, the grievance of the
petitioner challenging the impugned order as claimed in the
Writ Petition is not maintainable.
3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioenr
would only request that since his juniors, who were similarly
placed were also given promotion, he may be permitted to
make a representation. It is always open to the petitioner to
make a representation so as to bring to the notice of the
authorities concerned, if his juniors, who were similarly
placed were given promotion or any other persons were given
promotion even prior to this. When such a representation is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
made, suffice to state that the respondents shall consider the
same and pass orders, on merits and in accordance with law.
Insofar as the prayer in the Writ Petition challenging the
impugned order is concerned, the same is negatived. This Writ
Petition is closed. Consequently, connected M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of
2006 are closed. There will be no order as to costs.”
12. In view of the above order, the issue has attained finality
insofar as the promotion of writ petitioner as UDC notionally with effect
from 31.10.2001 and substantially with effect from 11.09.2006, thereby, the
main relief seeking to quash the proceedings dated 18.09.2006 itself
negatived.
13. It is relevant to refer the Recruitment Rules for the post of
Lower Division Clerk (LDC):
“RECRUITMENT RULES FOR THE POST OF LOWER DIVISION CLERK
1. Name of the post : LOWER DIVISION CLERK
...............
8. Educational and other qualification
required for direct recruits. : H.S.C. Passed. Typewriting
Lower in English and Tamil
Desirable:Experience in
Colleges/Higher Institutions/
Government Departments.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
....................
11. Method of recruitment whether : By promotion-60%
by direct recruitment or by By limited competitive
promotion or by deputation/transfer examination – 20%
and percentage of the vacancies to By direct recruitment-20%
be filled by various methods. ”
14. The finding of the learned Single Judge that the writ petitioner
should have been promoted with effect from 25.03.1993 by relaxing the
typewriting test in unfounded for the reason that the said issue had attained
finality in the earlier round of litigation initiated by the writ petition in
W.P.No.38340 of 2006 by order dated 12.03.2012 rejecting his claim. It is
pertinent to mention that the promotion of the writ petitioner to the post of
LDC in the year 1993 was by way of LDCE and not by seniority.
15. The learned Single Judge overlooked the factum of
qualification of the junior G.Murugesan and his marching over the
respondent was by the process of merit through the method of LDCE and
not by virtue of seniority. It is apropos to mention that the post of LDC is a
selection post and that merit is also a criteria for promotion and merit is the
only criteria through LDCE promotion.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
16. This Court is of the view that the promotion offered to the first
respondent/writ petitioner in accordance with the recruitment rules to the
post of UDC notionally with effect from 31.10.2001 and substantially with
effect from 11.09.2006 by proceedings dated 18.09.2006 has become final.
17. We are of the view that the order of the learned Single Judge is
unsustainable and the same is liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, these writ appeals are allowed by setting aside the
common order dated 05.10.2021 passed in W.P.Nos.33089 of 2013, 28484
& 33301 of 2014. No costs. Connected C.M.Ps. are closed.
(J.N.B., J.) (M.J.R., J.)
23-06-2025
nsd
Index:Yes
Speaking Order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
J.NISHA BANU J.
AND
M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
nsd
W.A.Nos.2393, 2394 & 2395 of 2022
23.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 23/06/2025 08:50:29 pm )
