Judgment :- V.S. SIRPURKAR, J. This writ petition is filed by the Government against the order passed by the Tamil Nadu State Administrative Tribunal whereby the Tribunal perhaps at the admission stage itself, allowed the original application filed by the respondent herein. Few facts would be necessary. The respondent herein was appointed as a middle school Headmaster on 18-10-1986 by way of a promotion. It is an admitted fact that he has passed his B.Ed. examination. He was then posted as an Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer. While he was working in that post, some disciplinary proceedings came to be instituted against him. With the result that he was placed under suspension on 8-8-1997. It seems that the suspension was later on revoked on 20-12-1997 and the posting orders were issued on 6-1-1998 and he was again posted as middle-school Headmaster. This order was challenged by the respondent suggesting that he was reverted without holding any enquiry. Therefore, the question before the Tribunal was as to whether the posting of the respondent from the post of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer in the post of middle school Headmaster amounted to his reversion. In short, the question was as to whether what was the ratio between the two posts and whether the post of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer was a promotional post. The tribunal, in its order, has held that the amendments dated 26-6-1995 show that while the post of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer is category I, the post of middle school Headmaster is category II. It is on the basis of this finding alone that the Tribunal then proceeded to hold that the post of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer is a promotional post. Clearly enough, there is also an observation to the following effect in the order :- "Besides the method of appointment to the post of Assistant Elementary Education Officer is by transfer from Headmaster of Middle School. From this, it is seen that the posts are not equal." The learned Special Government Pleader, who appeared for the petitioner, pointed out that the order was contradictory in terms. From this, it is seen that the posts are not equal." The learned Special Government Pleader, who appeared for the petitioner, pointed out that the order was contradictory in terms. According to the learned Government Pleader, if the post of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer could be filled in by transfer from the post of middle-school Headmaster, it was clear that the two posts were absolutely same categoried posts and on the same level and one could not be treated to be a promotional post of other. The learned Government Pleader also pointed out that merely because the post of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer was shown to be a category I post and the middle-school Headmaster is shown to be category II post, it did not mean that the post of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer was a promotional post. Our attention was drawn towards the amendments and the rules. The rules clearly show that the posts of Additional Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Headmasters and Headmistress of middle schools (B.Ed. Grade). Language Pandits (Tamil) and Language Pandits (Other than Tamil) come under category I. Again in unamended rule 2, it is seen that category I post of Assistant Elementary Educational Officer is to be filled in by transfer from Headmaster/Headmistress of middle school with B.Ed. qualification. Therefore, obviously the two posts are identical and on the same level and one post is not inferior or superior to the other. This is besides the point that admittedly the pay scale for both the posts is identical. Therefore, it is obvious that there was nothing wrong in the Government placing the respondent to the post of middle school Headmaster after his suspension was revoked.It was argued that this order of posting came by way of a punishment without any disciplinary enquiry. We are informed that the charge-sheet because of which the respondent was put under suspension ultimately resulted into a departmental enquiry whereby the respondent was separately punished. This suggests that the posting action was innocuous and had nothing to do with either the punishment in that enquiry which was separately granted. We are, therefore. of the clear opinion that the Tribunal has erred in treating the post of Assistant Elementary Education Officer to be a promotional post from the post of Headmaster of Middle School. This suggests that the posting action was innocuous and had nothing to do with either the punishment in that enquiry which was separately granted. We are, therefore. of the clear opinion that the Tribunal has erred in treating the post of Assistant Elementary Education Officer to be a promotional post from the post of Headmaster of Middle School. It was tried to be argued by way of a last resort by the learned counsel for the respondent that the Assistant Elementary Education Officer's powers are of supervisory nature and he can draw the benefits in terms of the allowances on account of his duties. That may be so. That does not make the post a promotional post. It was also pointed out that unless the Headmaster of Middle School passes a particular departmental examination, he/she cannot be appointed as Assistant Elementary Education Officer. The said departmental examination is obviously pertaining to the administration and by that alone it cannot be said that the post of Assistant Elementary Education Officer would be a promotional post. In the result, the writ petition succeeds. The order of the Tribunal is set aside. No costs.