IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 09.07.1999 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.NAGAMUTHU W.P.No.18799 of 1999 T.K.Sankaran .... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Buildings, Chennai 600 003. 2.M.Pandiarajan, Assistant, ACC., Corporation of Chennai. 3.P.Gajalakshmi Assistant, Education Department, Corporation of Chennai. 4.S.Sampath, Assistant Education Department, Corporation of Chennai. 5.C.Esra, Assistant, Education Department, Corporation of Chennai. 6.R.Narayanan, Assistant, A.C.C, Corporation of Chennai. 7.C.Balaji Babu, Assistant, Zone 7, Corporation of Chennai. 8.S.Ravanamma, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 9.S.Kalavathi, Assistant, Education Department, Corporation of Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10.M.Rani, Assistant, Works Department, Private St., Town Planning, Temporarily Bridges Department, Corporation of Chennai. 11.R.Janaki, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 12.T.S.Sivakumar, Assistant, Zone 8, Corporation of Chennai. 13.C.K.Sekar, Assistant, Revenue Department, Zone 8, Corporation of Chennai. 14.R.Sekar, Assistant, Land and Estate Department, Corporation of Chennai. 15.R.Ranganathan, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 16.T.Purushothaman, Assistant , Zone 4, Corporation of Chennai. 17.S.M.Kannagi, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 18.K.Ramadevi, Assistant, Zone 5, Corporation of Chennai. 19.S.Krishnaveni, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 20.E.Hariharasubramani, Assistant, Works Department, Town Planning Sec., Corporation of Chennai. 21.E.Fathima, Assistant, Buildings Department, Corporation of Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 22.J.Venkatesan, Assistant, Legal Cell, (Education Department), Corporation of Chennai. 23.S.Saidajabeen, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 24.P.Deivasree, Assistant, Electrical Department, Corporation of Chennai. 25.K.Sathyanarayanan, Assistant, Zone 8, Corporation of Chennai. 26.V.Gunarajan, Assistant, Zone 2, Corporation of Chennai. 27.R.Vanaja, Assistant, General Department, Corporation of Chennai. 28.M.Sivakumar, Assistant, Zone 5, Corporation of Chennai. 29.S.Jaganathan, Assistant, Revenue Department, Zone 5, Corporation of Chennai. 30.D.Arumugam, Assistant, Zone 3, Corporation of Chennai. 31.M. Anuradha, Assistant Zone 5, Corporation of Chennai. 32.V.S.Umasekar, Assistant, Works Department, Town Planning, Corporation of Chennai. 33.S.Suriabanu, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 34.P.Mohana, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 35.T.A.Krishnamoorthy, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 36.G.Annie Jayakumari, Assistant, Education Department, Corporation of Chennai. 37.A.Gandhimathi, Assistant, Zone 3, Corporation of Chennai. 38.P.Lakshmi, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 39.S.S.Ranganathan, Assistant, Zone 8, Corporation of Chennai. 40.K.Usha, Assistant, General Department, Corporation of Chennai. 41.S.Samapth, Assistant, Land and Estate Department, Corporation of Chennai. 42.Santha Thomas, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 43.P.Baskar, Assistant, Zone 7, Corporation of Chennai. 44.S.Vasudevan, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 45.K.Sakthivelmurugan, Assistant, A.C.C., Corporation of Chennai. 46.S.Kirubakaran, Assistant, Council Department, Corporation of Chennai. ... Respondents https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 1st respondent in Circular G.D.C. Na.Ka. No.E4/39618/99, dated 12.08.1999 and order of promotion awarded to the respondents 2 to 46 in G.D.C. Na.Ka.No. E4/39618/99, dated 16.11.1999 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to award promotion to the petitioner as Assistant on the basis of seniority. For petitioner : Mr.C.K.M.Appaji For respondent (s): Mr.V.Bahathidasan for R1 ORDER The petitioner has been working as a Junior Assistant in the 1st respondent Corporation from 28.11.1979 onwards. He was awarded Selection Grade w.e.f. 14.03.1991. His next avenue of promotion is to the post of Assistant. A Seniority list of Junior Assistants was prepared on 27.10.1984 in which the petitioner was placed at Sl.No.166. Subsequently, the 1st respondent Corporation promoted the respondents 2 to 46 as Assistants on the basis of seniority. The said order of promotion issued by the 1st respondent Corporation in G.D.C. Na.Ka.No.E4/39618/1999 dated 16.11.1999 is now challenged in this writ petition. 2. The main ground of challenge is that the petitioner has not been promoted to the post of Assistant, though as per the seniority he is eligible for the same, on the ground that he had not passed the Account Test for Subordinate Officers Part-I as well as the District Office Manual Test. 3. It is contended by the petitioner that as per the original by-law of the Corporation, a pass in S.S.L.C. was prescribed as necessary qualification for promotion to the post of Assistants. However, the by-law was amended by the Corporation Council as per the Resolution No.753, dated 26.04.1982. As per the said amended by-law, a pass in Account Test for Subordinate Officers Part-I as well as a pass in District Office Manual Test are necessary for promotion to the post of Assistant. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the said by-law was not approved by the Government as required under Section 352 of The Chennai City Municipal Corporation Act, 1919 ( hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and therefore, it is not valid and enforceable. In view of the same, according to the petitioner, he is entitled for promotion as per the original by-law. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed, wherein it is stated that a pass in Account Test for Subordinate Officers Part-I and a pass in District Office Manual were made essential qualification for promotion to the post of Assistant as per the Resolution No.753/1981, dated 26.04.1982. It is, however, admitted that the said by-law was not approved by the Government so far. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent Corporation further submitted that approval from the Government is only formal and so the by-law is enforceable even in the absence of approval from the Government. He further submitted that under Section 85 (3) (c) of the Act, the Council has got power to issue a by-law prescribing a qualification for Clause III and IV employees of the Corporation. It is only in exercise of such power, the said by-law dated 26.04.1982 was issued prescribing pass in the above two tests as necessary qualifications for promotion to the post of Assistants. Though the said by-law has not been approved , according to him, the said by-law has all along been followed by the Corporation and so it has become enforceable. 5. I have heard the rival submissions. 6. Section 85 (3) (c) of the Act reads as follows:- "Appointments to all posts included in Class III and in Class IV and to all other posts not so included shall be made by the appointments committee consisting of the Mayor, the Commissioner and two councillors elected by the council, which shall be established for the corporation subject to the bye-laws , if any, made by the council." 7. A plain reading of the above provision would make it clear that the corporation council has got power to issue by- law prescribing qualifications for the posts included in Clause III and IV. At this juncture, a reference to Section 352 (1) of the Act is necessary which runs as follows:- "Confirmation of by-laws by State Government – (1) No by-law made by the council under this Act shall have any validity unless and until it is sanctioned by the State Government." 8. The above provision makes it mandatory that any by- law issued by the Council should get the approval of the Government to make it valid. The said provision declares that unless such approval is obtained from the State Government the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ by-law shall not be valid. In the case on hand, admittedly, the by-law prescribing additional qualifications issued by the Council on 26.04.1982 has not been approved by the Government and as per Section 352 (1) of the Act, the said by-law is not valid and thus the same cannot be enforced. 9. As per the original bye-law, which was issued prior to 26.04.1982, the qualification for promotion to the post of Assistant is only a pass in S.S.L.C. Admittedly, the petitioner had passed the same. He was denied promotion only because, he did not pass the Account Test for Subordinate Officers Part -I and District Office Manual Test. Since the said by-law prescribing these two Tests as additional qualification is not valid, the petitioner is entitled for promotion to the post of Assistant. 10. In this writ petition, though the petitioner challenges the promotion of the respondents 2 to 46, at this length of time, I do not want to disturb the promotions given to them. The learned counsel for the petitioner would fairly concede that the petitioner is not very particular in getting the promotion given to the respondents 2 to 46 set aside. The learned counsel for the petitioner would fairly concede that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the 1st respondent Corporation to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant from the date on which his immediate Junior was promoted and his seniority is fixed above the place of his immediate junior in the post of Assistant and all other consequential benefits are given to him. 11. In view of the above position, the writ petition is disposed of, however, without costs, in the following terms; (1) The petitioner shall be promoted to the post of Assistant from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted. (2) The petitioner shall be given seniority in the post of Assistant from the date of promotion given to his immediate junior and in the seniority list of Assistants he shall be kept above his immediate junior. (3) However, the petitioner shall not be entitled for back wages in the post of Assistant. (4) His pay and other monetary benefits from the date of promotion to the post of Assistant shall be calculated notionally for the purpose of fixation https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ of future pay in the post of Assistant and other monetary benefits. kmk Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To The Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Buildings, Chennai 600 003. + 1 cc to Mr. C.K.M. Appaji, Advocate, SR No.30352 + 1 cc to Mr. V. Bharathidasan, Advocate, SR No.30042 TM(CO) SR/23.7.2009 W.P.No.18799 of 1999 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/