1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 09.12.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN W.P.(MD)NO.11424 of 2011 & M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 C.Stella Gnanamani Premila ... Petitioner Versus 1.The Special Commissioner & Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2.The District Collector, Trichy District, Trichy. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to promote the petitioner as Tahsildar from the date on which petitioner's juniors were given promotion as Tahsildar. For Petitioner :Mr.V.Paneer Selvam for M/s.C.S.Associates For Respondents :Mr.M.Alagudevan, Spl.Government Pleader. O R D E R The petitioner has come up with the above Writ Petition seeking a direction to the respondents to promote her to the post of Tahsildar from the date on which her juniors were promoted. 2.Heard Mr.V.Paneer Selvam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.Alagudevan, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents. 3. The petitioner was originally appointed as Assistant on 01.10.2001. Her name was included in the temporary panel of Deputy Tahsildar for the year 2007, by the proceedings of the District Collector, Tiruchirappalli District dated 16.03.2008. Her name was placed at Serial No.1 in the list and she was promoted as Deputy Tahsildar. She has been working as Deputy Tahsildar from March 2008. 4.By an order dated 30.06.2011, the District Collector, Tiruchirappalli, granted temporary promotion to several persons as Tahsildars under Rule 39(a)(i) of the General Rules for Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services. Persons whose names were below the name of the petitioner in the panel of the year 2007 for the post of Deputy Tahsildar, were included in the promotion order dated 30.06.2011. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5.Shocked by the non inclusion of her name in the promotion order, the petitioner gave a representations to the Collector and to the first respondent. Since the representation was not considered, the petitioner came up before this Court. 6.A few days before the petitioner came up with the above writ petition, the second respondent has issued a charge memo dated 08.09.2011. Though the charge framed against the petitioner is under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, the only charge alleged against the petitioner is that she misplaced the Government seal when she was working as Zonal Deputy Tahsildar in Musiri Taluk Office. I do not know how the same amounts to grave misconduct warranting issue of a charge memo for major penalty proceedings. 7.In any case, the charge memo was issued only on 08.09.2011. The promotion orders were issued on 30.06.2011. The promotion order was a temporary promotion order. Therefore, there was no bar for the petitioner's name being included therein. On the date of promotion order, the petitioner did not have any charge memo pending against her. 8.In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to consider the appeal of the petitioner dated 28.07.2011 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after taking note of the sequences of the events indicated and the observations made above. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. gsr Sd/- Assistant Registrar[CO] /True copy/ To Sub Assistant Registrar 1.THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER & COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE ADMINISTRATION, CHEPAUK, CHENNAI-5. 2.THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRICHY DISTRICT, TRICHY. +1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.NO.43235. +1 CC TO M/S.C.S.ASSOCIATES, ADVOCATE SR.NO.43185. W.P.(MD)NO.11424 of 2011 Dated:09.12.2011 2P/5C RPB : 15.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/