IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 18-06-2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.25994 of 2006 (O.A.No.7504 of 1995) R.Manian .. Petitioner. Versus 1.The State of Tamilnadu rep. by the Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Madras-9. 2.The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Madras-6. 3.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Trichy. 4.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Kulithalai, Trichy District. 5. G.Marahatham. .. Respondents. Prayer: This petition has been filed seeking for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the third respondent in this proceedings Na.Ka.No.3595/A2/95, dated 20.11.95, and quash the same and direct the respondents to repost him as Middle School Headmaster with effect from the date of reversion with all monetary and service benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Singaravelan For Respondents : Mr.T.Sreenivasan Additional Government Pleader (R1 to R4) O R D E R This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings of the third respondent in Na.Ka.3595/A2/95, dated 20.11.1995, and to direct the respondents to repost the petitioner as Middle School Headmaster, with effect from the date of the reversion with all monetary and service benefits. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. It has been stated that the petitioner was selected for appointment to the post of Higher Grade Teacher, on merits, and he had joined service, on 23.10.67. He was promoted to the post of Secondary Grade Assistant, on 27.3.71 and he was promoted to the post of Elementary School Headmaster, on 16.11.1992. Then, he was promoted to the post of Middle School Headmaster, on 1.9.95. 3. In spite of the fact that the petitioner has been placed at Sl.No.31 of the seniority list drawn by the Assistant Educational Officer and promoted to the post of Middle School Headmaster, by an order, dated 31.8.1995, the petitioner has been reverted from his promoted post, allegedly, due to administrative reasons. The petitioner had been given promotion in accordance with the prevailing rules and in view of G.O.Ms.No.400, Education, Science and Technology Department, dated 25.5.1995. The order of reversion had been passed by the third respondent by his order, dated 20.11.1995, without giving notice to the petitioner. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the third respondent is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in the eye of law. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the impugned order of the third respondent, dated 20.11.1995, reverting the petitioner from his promoted post, has been passed without giving notice to the petitioner and without giving him an opportunity to put forth his case. Further, no other reasons have been shown for reverting the petitioner, except stating that it is due to administrative reasons. 5. It has been further submitted that both the petitioner, as well as the 5th respondent had retired from service and therefore, it would suffice if this Court passes an order setting aside the impugned order of the third respondent, dated 20.11.1995, made in Na.Ka.No.3595/A2/95, and directs the respondents to regularise the service of the petitioner in the promoted post of Middle School Headmaster, in accordance with the order passed by the third respondent, on 31.8.95, in Na.Ka.No.3595/A2/95, with all pensionary benefits. 6. No reply affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, till date. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has not been in a position to refute the claims made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. In such circumstances, it is clear that the impugned order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.3595/A2/95, dated 20.11.95, is clearly without jurisdiction. It is seen from the records available before this Court that the impugned order has been passed by the third respondent without issuing a show cause notice to the petitioner and without giving reasons except stating that the reversion of the petitioner has been ordered due to administrative reasons. Therefore, the impugned order of the third respondent, made in Na.Ka.No.3595/A2/95, dated 20.11.95, reverting the petitioner from the post of Middle School Headmaster, is in violation of the principles of natural justice and the procedures established by law. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.3595/A2/95, dated 20.11.95, is set aside and the respondents are directed to regularise the promotion granted to the petitioner as Middle School headmaster, from the date of his reversion from the said post, notionally, only for the purpose of calculating the pensionary benefits that would accrue to the petitioner on his retirement from service. Accordingly, the writ petition is partly allowed, to the extent noted above. No costs. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. csh To 1. The Secretary to Government, State of Tamilnadu Education Department, Fort St. George, Madras-9. 2.The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Madras-6. 3.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Trichy. 4.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Kulithalai, Trichy District. 1 cc to Mr.R. Singaravelan, Advocate, SR. 30800 1 cc to the Government Pleader, SR. 30907 Writ Petition No.25994 of 2006 KA (CO) kk 3/7 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/