Judgment :- (This Writ petition came to be numbered by way of transfer of O.A.No.5441 of 2002 from the file of Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer to call for the records pertaining to the order passed by the first respondent in Pdl.24/2001/A1 dated 26.8.2002 as modified in Pdl.24/2001 dated 19.9.2002 and the order passed in Rc.No.Q1/33488/2002-5 dated 3.9.2002 and set aside the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned.) In this writ petition, petitioner seeks to quash the order of the first respondent in Pdl.24/2001/A1 dated 26.8.2002 as modified in Pdl.24/2001 dated 19.9.2002 and the order passed in Rc.No.Q1/33488/2002-5 dated 3.9.2002 in so far as the petitioner is concerned. 2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition are as follows, (a) Petitioner was appointed as Handloom Inspector in the office of the Assistant Director of Handlooms & Textiles, Tirunelveli on 16.7.1984, having been selected through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission. He was promoted as Handloom Officer on 3.2.1993, which is equivalent to the post of Superintendent. Petitioner passed B.Com Degree in the year 1979, Accounts Test for Subordinate Officers Part I & II in the year 1980 and thus, he is fully qualified to be appointed as Assistant Accounts Officer in the department of Treasuries and Accounts. (b) In the affidavit petitioner stated that in the Department of Treasuries and Accounts, as per the Special Rules, 60% of the post of Assistant Accounts Officer are to be filled up from among the qualified Superintendents of other departments on recruitment by transfer basis, provided they possess necessary qualification and the remaining 40% of vacancies are to be filled up by giving promotion to the persons working in the Treasuries & Accounts Department. The crucial date for filling up of 60% vacancies on recruitment by transfer basis from other departments is 15th June of every year. (c) Petitioner further states that for the year 2001, the Department of Treasuries & Accounts called for list of candidates from various departments from among the Superintendents, who possess necessary qualification for promotion to the post of Assistant Accounts Officers. According to the petitioner a circular was issued to the Handloom and Textiles Department, where the petitioner was working and he also furnished his particulars in the proforma as he possessed the requisite qualification to be appointed as Assistant Accounts Officer. According to the petitioner a circular was issued to the Handloom and Textiles Department, where the petitioner was working and he also furnished his particulars in the proforma as he possessed the requisite qualification to be appointed as Assistant Accounts Officer. (d) The case of the petitioner as stated in the affidavit is that the respondents 2 to 6, who were working in the Social Welfare Department, filed O.A.Nos.6836 to 6841 of 2001 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and prayed for implementation of filling up of 60% vacancies in the Treasuries & Accounts Department, in strict compliance with the Government Order and special rules. The apprehension expressed by the respondents 2 to 6 is that the Treasuries and Accounts Department may not fill up 60% of the vacancies meant for outsiders after filling up 40% of the vacancies earmarked for the department and thus the outsiders will be prejudiced if the quota of 60% is not filled up simultaneously. The Tribunal ordered to prepare a panel for the year 2000-2001 and include the names of the respondents 2 to 6 also in the panel and their name can be rejected only if seniors are available in the Ministerial service, that is, in other departments. (e) Further case of the petitioner is that the panel for the year 2000-2001 was published on 13.6.2002 and based on the panel petitioner was promoted as Assistant Accounts Officer, inasmuch as his name was placed at No.4 in the panel dated 13.6.2002. According to the petitioner, all the persons included in the panel were seniors to the respondents 2 to 6 herein and therefore the order of the Tribunal is not in any way violated. The case of the petitioner is that the department misunderstood the order of the Tribunal as if respondents 2 to 6 should be included in the panel and thereby revised the panel by order dated 26.8.2002. Consequently petitioner was reverted back from the post of Assistant Accounts Officer by order dated 3.9.2002, but no order of reversion was served on the petitioner and hence he was holding the post of Assistant Accounts Officer as per the original promotion. As one of the respondent's name was not included in the panel, he filed a contempt application and subsequently the panel was again revised on 19.9.2002. As one of the respondent's name was not included in the panel, he filed a contempt application and subsequently the panel was again revised on 19.9.2002. According to the petitioner the orders passed by the first respondent on 26.8.2002, 3.9.2002 and 19.9.2002 having been passed arbitrarily and with non-application of mind, the same are challenged in this writ petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that 60% of the vacancies in the Treasuries and Accounts Department in the cadre of Assistant Accounts Officer are to be strictly filled up on recruitment by transfer basis from other departments and strictly as per the seniority and the State Administrative Tribunal only directed to include the respondents 2 to 6 in the panel and give them promotion only if they are seniors to the persons found in the panel. Petitioner having been senior to respondents 2 to 6, there is no reason to revert him for including respondents 2 to 6 in the panel and the said action of the first respondent is without application of mind. 4. The learned Government Advocate as well as the learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 to 6 submitted that there is no illegality or irregularity in the orders passed by the first respondent and respondents 2 to 6 are entitled to get promotion as per the order of the Tribunal made in O.A.Nos.6836 to 6841 of 2001 dated 27.2.2002. 5. A bare reading of the order of the Tribunal dated 27.2.2002 and the relevant rule makes it clear that 60% vacancies in the post of Assistant Accounts Officer shall be filled up only from among the eligible candidates of other departments strictly on the basis of seniority in the cadre of Superintendents. In the order passed by the Tribunal a specific direction is given to include the name of the respondents 2 to 6 only if there is no seniors to them in other departments. Admittedly petitioner is senior to respondents 2 to 6, working in the department of Handloom and Textiles. 6. The learned Government Advocate pointed out Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu State Treasuries and Accounts Services Special Rules, which says that seniority of Superintendents in the department other than Treasuries and Accounts Department shall be fixed from the date of regular appointment. 6. The learned Government Advocate pointed out Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu State Treasuries and Accounts Services Special Rules, which says that seniority of Superintendents in the department other than Treasuries and Accounts Department shall be fixed from the date of regular appointment. According to the learned Government Advocate, since the petitioner has been temporarily promoted as Handloom Officer, that is in the feeder category to the Assistant Accounts Officer panel and his services were not regularised, his name is not entitled to be considered for the panel prepared for the year 2000-2001 based on the directions issued by the Tribunal dated 27.2.2002. 7. A perusal of Rule 11 of the Tamil Nadu State Treasuries and Accounts Services Special Rules clearly establishes that regularisation is necessary either in the cadre of Special Treasury Officer Grade II or Superintendent Grade II and in the said feeder categories respectively. For proper appreciation of the rule, the said rule is extracted hereunder, "11.SENIORITY: For the purpose of appointment to the post in Class IV, the inter-se-seniority of the persons selected from the posts of Sub Treasury Officer Grade I, Superintendents Grade I and from the post in the feeder categories namely, Accountants, Superintendents etc., in the Department other than Treasuries and Accounts Department shall be fixed with reference to the dates of their regular appointment in the post of Sub Treasury Officer Grade II or Superintendents Grade II and in the said feeder categories respectively." 8. It is not the case of the department that the petitioner's service was not regularised in the department of Handloom and Textiles. The counter affidavit proceeds on the basis that the petitioner's service was not regularised in the cadre of Handloom Officer (equivalent to Superintendent). Petitioner having been appointed as Handloom Inspector and his services having been regularised in that cadre, there is no necessity to get regularisation of the services in the promoted post of Handloom Officer because in the feeder category his services were already regularised. Therefore, there is no substance in the contention of the department that the services of the petitioner in the cadre of Handloom Officer having not been regularised, petitioner is not entitled to get promotion as Assistant Accounts Officer in the Treasuries and Accounts department. Therefore, there is no substance in the contention of the department that the services of the petitioner in the cadre of Handloom Officer having not been regularised, petitioner is not entitled to get promotion as Assistant Accounts Officer in the Treasuries and Accounts department. The above referred rule is also considered by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in its order dated 27.2.2002 in O.A.No.6836 of 2001 etc., wherein the qualifications prescribed for the post of Assistant Accounts Officer are clearly mentioned, which reads as under, "a) Must possess the minimum General Educational qualification. b) Must have passed Accountant Test for Subordinate Officers Part I & II. c) Must have passed Accountant Higher Grade or must be a commerce graduate from a recognised University. d) Must have worked as Superintendent/ Accountant/ Commercial Accountant/ Auditors borne on the Tamil Nadu Ministerial service or any other similar supervisory post carrying pay not less than that of the Superintendent in any other service in sections dealing with subjects relating to accounts, audit, budgeting or control of expenditure for a period of not less than 2 years. e) Must be as approved probationer in the category from which appointment made or in any of the lower categories in that service to which he was recruited." The said rule also clearly establishes the right of the petitioner that no regularisation in the immediate category is necessary, whereas regularisation is required only in the feeder category or in the lower category in which he was recruited. 9. For the foregoing reasons, I hold the stand of the department is unsustainable and the respondents 2 to 6 are admittedly juniors to the petitioner and the reversion of petitioner from the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, affecting his seniority, is unsustainable. 10. In the result, the writ petition is allowed as prayed for. No costs.