IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. RAJA W.P.No.22149 of 2009 D. Selvaraj ... Petitioner Versus 1.The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government Revenue Department Fort St. George Chennai – 600 009 2.The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Revenue Administration Chepauk, Chennai – 600 006 3.The District Collector Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District ... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India to issue a Writ of declaration in the nature of a writ, declaring that the retaining of the petitioner in the initially appointed post as Village Assistant without having any promotional opportunities for more than 34 years holding that "there is no avenues for promotion" when admittedly the petitioner is qualified for the post of Village Administrative Officer right from the initial date of his appointment either for promotion in the due course as per the Law laid down by the Honourable Supre Court or for appointment at least pursuant to G.O.Ms. No.439 Revenue (ser-7 (1) department dt 15.7.2008 keeping the petitioners Appeal dated 28.12.2007 pending without considering the same for years together is illegal. For Petitioner : Mr. A.Amalraj For Respondents : Mr. K.V.Dhanapalan Additional Government Pleader ORDER The petitioner-D.Selvaraj has filed the present Writ Petition seeking for the issuance of a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the retaining of the petitioner in the initially appointed post as 'Village Assistant' without having any promotional opportunities for https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ more than 34 years holding that, 'there is no avenues for promotion' when admittedly the petitioner is qualified for the post of 'Village Administrative Officer' right from the initial date of his appointment either for promotion in the due course as per the Law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court or for appointment at least pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.439, Revenue Ser 7 (1) Department, dated 15.07.2008 keeping the petitioner's Appeal dated 28.12.2007 pending without considering the same for years together is illegal. 2. Mr. A.Amalraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was originally appointed as 'Village Assistant' on 28.07.1975 at Lakshmipuram Village of Kanyakumari District. Subsequently, pursuant to the ordinance No.10/1980 'Village Munsif' and 'Village Karnam' posts were abolished with effect from 14.11.1980 merging them as one post called V.A.O. (Village Administrative Officer). Thereafter, the Village Administrative Officers were recruited through TNPSC (Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission), allotting the works hitherto performed by the 'Village Munsif' and 'Village Karnam' to 'Village Administrative Officers'. Later on aggrieved individuals have approached this Court and finally the matter was decided by the Supreme Court. When the matter was settled, a Memorandum of Compromise was submitted by the Government of Tamil Nadu before the Supreme Court and thereafter, the aggrieved 'Village Munsiffs' and 'Village Karnams' were reinstated as 'Village Administrative Officers' in a phased manner subject to the following conditions:- “a) They should be possessed with Minimum General Educational Qualification (S.S.L.C. pass Certificate). b) They should not be physically unfit. c) They should not have attained the age of superannuation that is 58 years. d) They should not have suffered punishment for gave charges in their previous employment.” But the grievance of the petitioner is that he has appeared for the special written examination conducted by the TNPSC for the post of 'Village Administrative Officer' on 13.01.1981 and passed the same. Thereafter, he appeared for the personal interview conducted by the thrid respondent on 19.06.1981 and on merits, his name was considered but however he was asked to produce 'no objection certificate' from the Department where he was working. The petitioner also produced the 'no objection certificate' issued by the Department to the Secretary, TNPSC, but, unfortunately the Secretary, TNPSC has not turned up either to give appointment as assured on production of 'no objection certificate' from the petitioner's employer. Therefore, it was contended that though the petitioner was qualified in all aspects to be appointed as a 'Village Administrative Officer', the G.O.Ms.No.439, Revenue Ser 7 (1) Department, dated 15.07.2008 was https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ issued specifically for the appointment of 'Village Administrative Officers' to those who have passed Village Officers Test prior to 14.11.1980 together with 'age relaxation'. When the G.O.Ms.No.439, Revenue Ser 7 (1) Department, dated 15.07.2008 was issued by the Government only for the purpose of giving benefit as one time measurement to those who have worked as 'Village Munsif” or 'Village Karnam', the petitioner having passed the requisite test, has to be given only age relaxation, but the same has not been considered. Therefore, the petitioner has come to this Court by way of filing the present Writ Petition. 3. Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents opposing the said prayer has brought to the notice of this Court that the earlier order passed by this Court in W.P.No.14144 of 2006, dated 18.09.2008 filed by the very same petitioner-D.Selvaraj, wherein this Court while considering the case of the petitioner has specifically adverted to G.O.Ms.No.439, Revenue Ser 7(1) Department, dated 15.07.2008 which prescribes a selection procedure for the post of Village Administrative Officers, from the persons who have passed the Village Officers Test prior to 14.11.1980 and on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.439, Revenue Ser 7 (1) Department, dated 15.07.2008, this Court while dismissing the case of the petitioner, has made it clear that if the Government is inclined to relax the age limit in respect of those persons who had already qualified for the post of Village Administrative Officer, it is being an independent cause of action, the dismissal of the earlier Writ Petition would not stand in the way of the petitioner. By observing so, liberty was given to the petitioner to approach only the Government for getting age relaxation on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.439, Revenue Ser 7 (1) Department, dated 15.07.2008. 4. Therefore, as rightly submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents when the entire case of the petitioner was well considered by this Court in the Writ Petition No.14144 of 2006, dated 18.09.2008 in paragraphs 9 and 10 thereof, this Court may not be able to once again go into the same issue. The relevant Paragraphs of the above said earlier order passed by this Court are extracted hereunder:- "9. As the petitioner, was not holding the post of Village Administrative Officer, as on 14.11.1980, he has no legal or statutory right to claim appointment to the said post on the basis of the orders of the Supreme Court. However, it could be seen that from the pleadings that his claim for appointment is based on his selection said to have been made by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission for the above said post during 1981. It is trite law that selection alone does not confer a right to seek for appointment. The petitioner is not able to prove https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ that persons selected by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and allotted to Kanyakumari District were appointed, overlooking his claim. In such circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to the relief sought for in the Writ Petition. 10. However, during the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Government have issued G.O.(Ms)No.439 Revenue Ser 7 (1) Department dated 15.07.2008 prescribing a selection procedure for the post of Village Administrative Officers, from the persons who have passed the Village Officers test prior to 14.11.1980. Learned counsel for the petitioner, further submitted that as the petitioner had already passed the required examination for the post of Village Administrative Officer, but due to passage of time, he had crossed the maximum age prescribed for the post of Village Administrative Officer, dismissal of this Writ Petition should not be put against the petitioner in the matter of relaxation of the age by the Government. If the Government, is inclined to relax the age limit in respect of those persons who had already qualified for the post of Village Administrative Officer, dismissal of this Writ Petition, would not stand as an impediment, as it is an independent cause of action. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is dismissed. N costs." 5. With the above observation, this Court finds no merits in the Writ Petition accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar //True Copy// Sub.Asst.Registrar smn To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government Government of Tamil Nadu Revenue Department Fort St. George Chennai – 600 009 2.The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Revenue Administration Chepauk, Chennai – 600 006 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3.The District Collector Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District. 1 cc To Government Pleader, SR.No.32786 1 cc to Mr.A.Amalraj , Advocate, Sr.No.31987 W.P.No.22149 of 2009 tam(co) pmk.12.8.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/