1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.07.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD).No.7489 of 2011 S.Mahadevan ... Petitioner -Vs- 1. State rep. by its Principal Secretary-cum- Revenue Executive Commissioner, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. 2. The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 3. The District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the approved Seniority List of Assistants for promotion to the post of Deputy Tahsildar for the year 2010 along with others with order of Seniority without insisting the minor punishment of censure. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramu For Respondents : Mr.B.Pugalenthi Special Government Pleader ORDER Seeking for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the approved Seniority List of Assistants for promotion to the post of Deputy Tahsildar for the year 2010 along with others with order of Seniority without insisting the minor punishment of censure, the petitioner has preferred the present Writ Petition. 2. According to him, following a disciplinary action, the petitioner was inflicted with a minor penalty of censure by the District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai, the third respondent herein, vide proceedings dated 16.03.2010. As he has completed 18 years of service as an Assistant, he is eligible for consideration to the post of Deputy Tahsildar. He made a representation, dated 15.06.2011 to the Principal Secretary -cum- Revenue Executive Commissioner, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005, the first respondent herein to include the name in the panel. A https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 similar request was also made to the District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai, the second respondent herein. Without considering his request in proper perspective, by way of a memo, dated 30.05.2011, the District Collector, Sivagangai, has turned down his request on the ground that a punishment of censure imposed vide proceedings No.A2/24259/2009 dated 16.03.2010 was pending against the petitioner. In these circumstances, placing reliance on the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in Subramanian Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Chennai and others reported in 2008 (5) MLJ 350, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the respondents ought to have considered his case for promotion to the post of Deputy Tahsildar. 3. Opposing the relief, Mr.B.Pugalenthi, learned Special Government Pleader, submitted that the issue is squarely covered a Full Bench decision of this Court in case of the Deputy Inspector General of Police & Others Vs. V.Rani reported in 2011 (3) CTC 129, wherein the Full Bench decision has over ruled the decision relied on by the writ petitioner. He further submitted that the minor punishment during its currency, can be put against a Government Servant for not including his name in the panel. For the above said reason, he prayed for the dismissal of the Writ Petition. 4. Heard the parties and perused the materials available on record. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner has been imposed with a minor penalty of 'censure' on 16.03.2010 by the District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. Further, when the petitioner made a request to include his name in the panel of Deputy Tahsildar for the year 2010, by an order, dated 30.05.2011, the District Collector, Sivagangai, the second respondent herein, has rejected his request on the ground that the above said punishment was pending against him. The said order has not been put to challenge by the writ petitioner. Nevertheless, the decision relied on by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has been over ruled in V.Rani's case, where the Full Bench of this Court in paragraph 28 (h) as held as follows:- "During the period of currency of minor punishment, an employee cannot claim as a matter of right to be promoted to the next category merely on the basis that he is otherwise fit for promotion and to that extent, the finding of the Division Bench in Subramanian Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Chennai and others reported in 2008 (5) MLJ 350 stands overruled. It is needless to state that after the currency of punishment period, the Government servant is entitled to be considered for promotion to the next post, if otherwise eligible." https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 6. In view of the settled legal position of law and the for the reasons stated supra, the claim of the petitioner for inclusion of his name in the panel cannot be acceded and therefore, the Mandamus sought for is declined. Hence, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. The Principal Secretary-cum- Revenue Executive Commissioner, Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. 2. The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 3. The District Revenue Officer, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. vsg akm/13.07.11 /3p-4c/ W.P.(MD).No.7489 of 2011 07.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/