High Court · 2025

W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDate of Reserving the OrderDate of Pronouncing the Order 06.11.202516.12.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABUW.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025J.Gnana Sahaya Santhiya... Petitioner-vs-1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Govt., Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Fort St., George, Chennai – 600 009.2.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.... RespondentsPRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified Mandamus to call for the record pertaining to the impugned order of the first respondent dated 07.07.2014 made in G.O(3D).No.13 Revenue and Disaster Management Department, dated 30.01.2025 and quash the same as illegal and unlawful consequently direct the first Page 1 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025respondent to declare the petitioner's probation completed successfully on 24.01.2019, consequently direct the respondents to provide all service and monetary benefits to the petitioner. For Petitioner:Mr.J.PooventherarajanFor Respondents:Mr.M.SiddharthanAdditional Government Pleader O R D E RThis Writ Petition had been filed to quash the impugned order of the first respondent, made in G.O(3D).No.13 Revenue and Disaster Management Department, dated 30.01.2025 as illegal and unlawful and consequently direct the first respondent to declare the petitioner's probation completed successfully on 24.01.2019, consequently direct the respondents to provide all service and monetary benefits to the petitioner.2. Heard Mr.J.Pooventherarajan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.M.Siddharthan, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that Page 2 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025the petitioner was appointed as Village Administrative Officer on compassionate grounds wherein the petitioner had also joined in the service on 23.01.2017. The petitioner's services was regularised w.e.f., the initial date of joining in service by proceedings of the second respondent dated 20.12.2021. According to him, the period of probation namely two years would have ended on 22.01.2019. From the date of appointment, no departmental exam was conducted and the same was only conducted on 07.11.2020. He would submit that the petitioner had been on maternity leave from 07.09.2020 to 03.06.2021. Even though the petitioner had made a request for herself to be permitted to participate in the departmental examination, the second respondent had refused such permission. Thereafter, the departmental exam was only conducted on 18.04.2023 in which she had successfully cleared the examination. In the interregnum, the petitioner has also completed the training in the Village Administration Training and Survey Training. The first respondent had declared the petitioner had successfully completed probation on 19.04.2023 and not on completion of two years from the date of initial appointment. He would submit that it is not the mistake of the petitioner in not taking part in the departmental examination as the departmental examination had not been conducted by the respondents as mandated. In view of the same, the petitioner had been denied her right of Page 3 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025promotion and other service benefits including the increments. Hence, he seeks indulgence with the order impugned herein insofar as the declaring the petitioner to have satisfactorily completed the probation only w.e.f. 19.04.2023 and consequently direct the first respondent to declare the petitioner's probation to have been successfully completed on 24.01.2019 and to provide all service and monetary benefits to the petitioner. The learned counsel had also circulated the information received by him under the Right to Information Act, where there is a mandate for the respondents to conduct the departmental examination thrice in a year.4. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner had joined in the services on 23.01.2017 on compassionate ground and it is for her to complete the probation within a period of two years. For declaring the probation, the petitioner had to pass a departmental examination on the powers and duties of Village Administrative Officer, Village Sanitation and Manual of Village Accounts which was conducted by the District Administration. The petitioner was admittedly on maternity leave from 06.08.2018 to 02.05.2019 and 07.09.2020 to 03.06.2021. A Departmental exam was conducted on 07.11.2020, in which the petitioner did not participate as she was on Page 4 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025maternity leave. She had cleared the examination that was conducted on 18.04.2023. As the petitioner had not cleared the departmental examination within the period of five years from the date of appointment, the probation of the petitioner was declared satisfactorily w.e.f., 19.04.2023 namely the date falling next day of appearing in the test. According to him, the delay in passing the text cannot be attributed to the department, as the petitioner had failed to attend the test that was conducted on 07.11.2020 and the petitioner attended the test that was conducted in 2020, the petitioner's claim could have been considered, as if she had only cleared the examination that was conducted later. The petitioner is only entitled to get the probation declared on the next day on which the examination was conducted and therefore, he would submit that there is no error in the order impugned in the Writ Petition and hence, he prays this Court to dismiss the Writ Petition.5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.6. There is no dispute with regard to the date of appointment and the eligibility of date on which the petitioner ought to have been entitled for declaring herself to have satisfactorily completed the probation. Page 5 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 20257. It is an admitted case that after the petitioner had joined the service, a departmental examination came to be held on 07.11.2020 and thereafter an other examination was conducted on 18.04.2023. When provisions governing the conditions of service of the Government servants envisages that only on completion of the required departmental test, probation can be declared successfully for grant of various other benefits and that a ruling under FR 26(a) also prohibits grant of increment to the probationer on the failure to complete the test within the desired period, entitling them to such increments only from the date following the last date of examination in the subjects, it is only proper for the Government to periodically conduct such departmental exam.8. It is not the case of the respondents that such departmental examination are being conducted periodically as envisaged. Having failed to conduct the departmental examination periodically, the employees cannot be put at disadvantageous position. It is true that the petitioner had not attended the first examination conducted on 07.11.2020 after her appointment and the reasons attributed by the petitioner cannot also be brushed aside as the Page 6 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025maternity leave has been approved by the department. The first examination after appointment of the petitioner in the case of the petitioner can only be 18.04.2023. 9. It is also to be noted that the petitioner had completed the required trainings which she had been deputed. It had been repeatedly held by this Court that the employee cannot be put at fault for being sent for training belatedly and in the present case, the petitioner had completed part of training prior to the date of completion of two years and partly after the period of two years. The examination has also not been conducted periodically and in the first attempt of the petitioner, she has also cleared the said examination.10.For the aforesaid reasons, the Writ Petition stands allowed and the declaration of completion of satisfactory period of probation under the impugned order as 18.04.2023 alone is set aside and the petitioner is declared to have satisfactorily completed the period of probation on 24.01.2019 and as a sequel, the respondents are directed to grant all the service and monetary benefits that the petitioner would be entitled to. Such exercise shall be carried out by the respondents within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Page 7 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025 16.12.2025NCC :Yes / NoIndex :Yes / NoInternet:Yes / No PbnTo:1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Govt., Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Fort St., George, Chennai – 600 009.2.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District, Pudukkottai.Page 8 of 9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.7461 of 2025K.KUMARESH BABU, J.PbnPRE-DELIVERY ORDERINW.P.(MD) No.7461 of 202516.12.2025Page 9 of 9