1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 5/4/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN Writ Petition (MD)No.433 of 2011 S. Gomathinayagam ...Petitioner Vs. 1. State of Tamil Nadu,rep. By its Secretary to Government Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Secretariat, Chennai. 2. State of Tamil Nadu rep. By its Deputy Secretary to Government Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Secretariat, Chennai. 3. The Inspector General of Registration Santhome, Chennai 600 029. ...Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the Proceedings of the second respondent in Letter No.20179/H1/99-4 C.T Department dated 23/2/2000 and the consequential proceedings of the third respondent made in No.44751/A1/2007 dated 29/4/2009 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to give accelerated promotion to the petitioner in terms of G.O.Ms.No.175 Personnel and Administrative Reform(s) Department dated 10/7/1998. For Petitioner : Mr.M. Suresh Kumar For Respondent : Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, AGP O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Thilak Kumar, Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. 2. Challenging the impugned order of the second respondent dated 23/2/2000 and the proceeding of the third respondent dated 29/4/2009 with a further direction to the first respondent to give accelerated promotion in terms of G.O.Ms.No.175 Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department dated 10/7/1998, the present writ petition is laid. 3. The case of the petitioner in a nut shell is stated hereunder:- The petitioner joined the service of the Registration Department on 26/2/1980 through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. In the year, 1987, he was promoted as Grade I Sub-Registrar and further in the year 1994, he was promoted as District Registrar. As on today, he is working as Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Tirunelveli. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 1. 4. On 6/12/1992, Baber Masjeth was demolished at Uttar Pradesh State and in consequence of the same, through out India, various mob violences took place. At Melapalayam, Tirunelveli District, there is a Sub-Registrar Office which was also attacked by the violent mob. The petitioner was the Sub-Registrar at that relevant point of time. Sensing trouble, the petitioner entered the scene of occurrence. Risking his life, he has safeguarded the entire registered documents. 5. The Government of Tamil Nadu in order to encourage the Employees who have extended their work in a great manner under dangers and special circumstances at the risk of their life had passed G.O.Ms.No.175 Personnel and Administrative Reforms dated 10/7/1998. As per the said G.O., the persons who have risked their life in order to safeguard the persons or property are entitled for accelerated promotion. The petitioner therefore, approached the respondents for giving him accelerated promotion. However, it has been turned down on the ground that G.O granting accelerated promotion was passed on 10/7/1998 but whereas the petitioner said to have taken risk in safeguarding the documents at the office of the Sub-Registrar, Melapalayam in the year 1992. Thus, the said orders are under challenge in the present writ petition. 6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously contended that even though G.O., came into effect in the year 1998, the same is applicable to the petitioner also who has safeguarded the documents in the Sub-Registrar Office at Melapalayam taking the risk of his life. That apart, he has contended that G.O., referred to above do not indicate that it is applicable only on and from the date of passing the G.O. Hence, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the said G.O., will be applicable to the case of the petitioner also. 7. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents contended that the said G.O., has got prospective effect and not retrospective effect. Hence, according to the learned Additional Government Pleader, the respondents rejected the claim of the petitioner and the same does not require any interference from this Court. 8. On a careful consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, I am of the considered view that the petitioner may not be entitled for any accelerated promotion. In commemoration of the Golden Jubilee of Indian Independence, the Government has decided to introduce a scheme for rewarding Government servants, who risked their lives to perform their duties under dangerous and special circumstances with a sense of duty and sacrifice. In pursuance to the said decision, the Government has passed G.O.Ms.No.175, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department dated 10/7/1998. As per the said G.O., the Government has formed a Board comprising certain officials viz., https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 (i). the Secretary to Government of the concerned Department in Secretariat as Chairman, (ii). Head of the Department concerned as a Member and (iii). a representative of Secretary to Government, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, not below the rank of the Deputy Secretary to Government as Member. The Board so constituted would decide the Government Servants who are entitled to have the benefit of the said G.O. Thus, the G.O., cannot have retrospective effect but only prospective effect. 9. As far as the case of the petitioner is concerned, according to him, he has risked his life to save the documents in the Sub-Registrar Office at Melapalayam on 6/12/1992. In such circumstances as rightly pointed out by the respondents, the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the G.O., referred to above. Hence, I am of the considered view that the respondents have rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner and hence, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the said order. 10. In the result, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also dismissed. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( CRL SIDE ) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR mvs. To 1. The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Secretariat, Chennai. 2. The Deputy Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu Commercial Taxes and Registration Department Secretariat, Chennai. 3. The Inspector General of Registration Santhome, Chennai 600 029. 1CC TO MR. M. SURESH KUMAR, ADVOCATE, SR: 12684: 1CC TO THE SPL. GOVT PLEADER SR: 12712: DM:2011:APRIL:29:: W.P.(MD)No.433 of 2011 5/4/2011 3P:6C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/