P.Subramanian v. The Commissioner,Tiruchirapalli City Corporation,Trichy 620 001

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 12-12-2008CORAMTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P.No.3669 of 2003P.Subramanian.. Petitioner.VersusThe Commissioner,Tiruchirapalli City Corporation,Trichy 620 001... Respondent.Prayer:This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of theConstitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ ofCertiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to theimpugned order passed by the respondent herein in his proceedingsNa.Ka.No.2898/2001/C1/(Maiyam), dated 1.2.2003, on the file of therespondent and quash the same and direct the respondent to allow thepetitioner to work as Assistant together with all consequentialservice and monetary benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Bala For Respondent : Mr.P.Srinivas O R D E RHeard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and thelearned counsel appearing for the respondent.2. The petitioner has stated that he had joined the Governmentservices as a Bill Collector, on 7.6.85, at Krishnarayapuram and hehad worked as such at different stations. During the year 1994,while he was working at K.Abishekapuram the concerned Municipalitywas merged with the Corporation of the Tiruchirapalli City, whichcomes under the control and jurisdiction of the Commissioner of theCorporation.3. It had been further stated that the petitioner had passed theAccounts Test and the other Departmental Tests in the year 1992.Thus, he had become eligible for further promotions. While so, on22.8.86, the Government had passed an order in G.O.Ms.No.773,according to which the posts of Bill Collectors and JuniorAssistants were made inter-transferable. Accordingly, thepetitioner's seniority was fixed with effect from 22.8.86, along https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ with the other Bill Collectors and Junior Assistants. On 4.12.96,the respondent had published a provisional seniority list in whichthe name of the petitioner was included at Serial No.14. Theseniority list was finalised, on 25.7.98 and on 2.9.98, promotionswere made. The petitioner was promoted as an Assistant and posted toPonmalai Ward. The petitioner had joined the post as an Assistant,on 4.9.98, and he has been working as such till the date of thefiling of the above writ petition. However, the respondent hadpassed an order, on 1.2.2003, reverting the petitioner as a JuniorAssistant with effect from 4.9.98, without issuing any prior noticeto the petitioner. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondentsit has been stated that the petitioner has been working as a BillCollector in the erstwhile Town Panchayats in TiruchirapalliDistrict. When Tiruchirapalli Municipality was upgraded as aCorporation, on 1.5.94, the petitioner was absorbed in the serviceof the Corporation based on the option exercised by him. It has beenfurther stated that the passing of the departmental tests bythemselves would not entitle the petitioner to be considered forfuture promotions. The petitioner is required to fulfill all theother essential qualifications prescribed in the Corporation ServiceRules, 1996, for being eligible for the promotions. As per theCorporation Service Rules, 1996, which came into force from 1.10.96,the method and qualification for filing up the post of Assistant isas follows:------------------------------------------------------------------Name of the Post Method and qualification prescribed in Service Rules, 1996------------------------------------------------------------------AssistantBy direct Recruitment1. Must Possess a degree of recognised University2. Must have passed the foundational training for the Corporation Service before the date of completion probation.AssistantBy Promotion By Promotion from the holders of the Post of Junior Assistantcum Typist.--------------------------------------------------------------------5. It has been further stated that certain clarifications hadbeen issued in respect of promotions for the existing Tax Collectorsin G.O.Ms.No.140, Municipal Administration and Water SupplyDepartment, dated 27.5.97. Accordingly, the Tax Collectors, who haveless than 20 years of service as on 27.5.97, would have to workunder the new service rules in other categories of posts. Since thepetitioner had rendered a total service of less than 18 years in the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ post of Tax Collector he was not qualified for promotion to thecadre of Assistant. Further, the Government Order No.773, MunicipalAdministration and Water Supply Department, dated 22.8.86, by whichthe service of Bill Collectors and Junior Assistants was ordered tobe inter-transferable, had been issued, exclusively, for themunicipal employees and it does not apply to the servants of thePanchayat Department. As such the petitioner cannot claim any rightbased on the said Government Order. 6. It has been further stated that as per G.O.Ms.No.1435 PublicDepartment, dated 19.8.64, the appointing authority shall issuenecessary orders reverting the individual, if it was found that anincorrect order of promotion had been issued. In such circumstances,there would be no need for issuing of show cause notices beforepassing an order reverting the individual concerned. Accordingly,the petitioner was issued the necessary notice, vide proceedings C1(M)/2898/2001, dated 1.2.2003, clearly stating the specific reasonsfor his reversion and for the non-inclusion of his name in the panelfor the post of Assistant. 7. At this stage of the hearing of the writ petition the learnedcounsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had placed before thisCourt an order, dated 29.11.2006, made in W.P.No.7207 of 2003 (N.UmaKanthan Vs. The Commissioner Trichirapalli Corporation,Tiruchirapalli) issued under similar facts and circumstances as inthe present case. 8. By the said order this Court had held that the petitionertherein ought to have been given a reasonable opportunity to putforth his case before passing the impugned order. Even in thepresent case it is clear that no notice had been issued to thepetitioner and no opportunity had been given to put forth his casebefore the impugned order had been passed by the respondent. Thelearned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the orderpassed by this Court W.P.No.7207 of 2003 had become final. It isalso seen that this Court had granted an interim stay of theimpugned order, on 6.2.2003, in W.P.M.P.No.4362 of 2003 and the samehad been made absolute subsequently. Accordingly, the petitioner hasbeen continuing in the promoted post till date. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent hasnot refuted the statements made by the learned counsel for thepetitioner. 10. From the records available before this Court, it is clearthat no notice had been issued to the petitioner before therespondent had passed the impugned order. No opportunity was givento the petitioner to put forth his case before he was reverted fromthe promoted post of Assistant to that of a Junior Assistant. Theimpugned order has been issued by the respondent after nearly 5years after promoting the petitioner as an Assistant. In such https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that therespondent has not shown sufficient cause or reason for this Courtto sustain the impugned order, dated 1.2.2003. Hence, the writpetition stands allowed. No costs.Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.cshToThe Commissioner,Tiruchirapalli City Corporation,Trichy 620 001.1 cc to mr.P. Srinivas, Advocate, Sr. 688101 cc to M/s. G. Bala and Daisy, Advocate, SR. 68310W.P.No.3669 of 2003MSM (CO)kk 13/2