JUDGMENT :- Being aggrieved with the order dated 10.12.2010, of the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Head of Forest Force), Chennai, wherein the name of the petitioner was not selected to be included in the panel of Foresters fit for promotion as Rangers for the year 2010-11 qualified as on 15.08.2010, the petitioner has sought for a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the same and consequently prayed for a direction to the respondents to include his name in the approved list of Forest Rangers for the year 2010 with all service and monetary benefits. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined as Junior Assistant on 08.11.1985 in the Forest Department and thereafter, promoted to the post of Assistant on 04.03.1992. Subsequently, he was transferred and included in the category of Forester in the year 1994 in the Forest Subordinate Service and joined duty as Forester from 01.02.1996, in which post he is still continuing. It is the further case of the petitioner that when he was working as Forester in W. Pudupatti Section in Srivilliputhur Forest Range, a charge memo was issued under Rule 17-a of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Though the petitioner has submitted a detailed explanation that he had not committed any misconduct, a punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of one year without cumulative effect was inflicted by proceedings of the conservator of Forest, Virudhunagar, dated 30.11.2006. In yet another proceedings, a punishment of censure was also awarded vide proceedings No.3045/2006/E dated 28.02.2007 by the Wile Life Warden. 3. In addition to the above, a charge memo under Rule 17-a of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules framed by the Wile Life Warden, Srivilliputhur in his memo C.No.6839/2008/M, dated 10.08.2010 was also pending. 4. The petitioner has further contended that proposals were called for, for approval of list of Forest Rangers for the year 2009. The name of the petitioner was omitted to be included on the ground that the petitioner had suffered the punishment of stoppage of increment for one year and besides, he was issued a charge memo under Rule 17-a of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11884 of 2009. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11884 of 2009. Though the petitioner was overlooked once, even though in 2010, the respondent has failed to include the name of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Forest Ranger on the very same ground. In these circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition for the relief stated supra. 5. On the above said pleadings and placing reliance of a Full Bench Decision of this Court reported in 2011 (3) CTC 129 ) (The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Thanjavur Range v. V. Rani), Mr. S. Visvalingam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that when the period of punishment viz., stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect and censure awarded by the Wild Life Warden, have already been expired, the respondent has not considered the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Ranger, notwithstanding the fact that the charge memo under Rule 17-a of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, pending consideration from 10.08.2010 cannot be held as a bar for promotion. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that pendency of the charge memo under Rule 17-a of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, is not a bar for promotion. According to him, when a Full Bench of this Court has held that the embargo put on the right of Government servant for being considered for promotion for a further period, after the period of minor punishment is over, in the name of ‘check period’ viz., one year in the case of censure and five years in the case other minor punishments is illegal and impermissible under the statutory rules, the petitioner is entitled to be considered for the promotion of Forest Ranger for the year 2010-11 and consequently, to be included in the approved list of Forest Rangers for the year 2010 with all service and monetary benefits. For the aforesaid reasons, he prayed for quashing the impugned order. 6. On the basis of the instructions from the Principal Conservator of Forest, Chennai, Mr. For the aforesaid reasons, he prayed for quashing the impugned order. 6. On the basis of the instructions from the Principal Conservator of Forest, Chennai, Mr. T.S. Mohammed Mohideen, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the criteria for the appointment of the post of Forest Ranger Office on promotion from the category of Foresters are as follows:- a) Must have possessed the minimum general educational qualification as specified in the schedule-I to the General Rules; b) must have completed successfully a course training for Foresters in a State forestry training school; c) must have served as Forester for a period of not less than eight years; d) must have passed the following departmental tests viz., (i) Forest law, and (ii) Office procedure and Accounts e) Free from punishments and pending of charge sheet framed under 17(b) of TNCS (D&A) Rules. 7. Learned Additional Government Pleader further submitted that the petitioner earlier filed a writ petition in W.P.No.11884 of 2009 and this Court, by order dated 19.11.2009, directed the respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the panel for the promotion of Forest Ranger Officers for the year 2009, if the petitioner is otherwise eligible for the said promotion. Against which, the respondent has filed a writ appeal in W.A.SR.No.5826 of 2011 before this Court, and the same is still pending. 8. He submitted that the crucial date for the above said panel was 15.08.2010 and a careful scrutiny of the petitioner’s service records revealed that the petitioner while, working as Forester in Pudupatti Section of Srivilliputhur Range of Srivilliputhur Wildlife division, was charge sheeted and imposed with a punishment by the Conservator of Forest, Virudhunagar Circle in his Ref.No.9482/2006 dated 13.09.2066 under Rule 17-a of the TNCS (D&A) Rules for certain irregularities. Further, the petitioner was also charge sheeted and imposed a punishment under Rule 17-a of the TNCS (D&A) Rules for another case for illicit felling of trees during his tenure as Forester in Marudadi Beat of Pudupatti Section of Srivilliputhur Range by the Wildlife Warden, Grizzled Squirrel Sanctuary, Srivilliputhur in No.3045 of 2006 dated 07.12.2006. 9. He further submitted that though the punishment of postponement of increment for one year without cumulative effect awarded by the Conservator of Forests, Virudhunagar Circle, dated 30.11.2006, was over by 31.12.2007, but the said punishment come under the check period of five years i.e. 16.08.2005 to 15.08.2010. 9. He further submitted that though the punishment of postponement of increment for one year without cumulative effect awarded by the Conservator of Forests, Virudhunagar Circle, dated 30.11.2006, was over by 31.12.2007, but the said punishment come under the check period of five years i.e. 16.08.2005 to 15.08.2010. The occurrence of alleged irregularities also took place during the year 2006 which comes under check period of five years. According to him, the Government instructions/guidelines issued in Lr.No.18824/5/2005-2, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (5) Department, dated 07.10.2005 stipulates that ‘any punishment other than ‘censure’ imposed on an officer within a period of five years prior to the crucial date and a punishment of ‘censure’ within a period of one year prior to the crucial date (or censure imposed after the crucial date, but before actual promotion) should be held against the officer. In such a case, the officer’s name should be passed over. In the case of the petitioner, the punishment of postponement of increment as well as the occurrence of the irregularities falls within the period of five years and therefore, the name of the petitioner was not included for promotion to the post of Forest Range Officer for the year 2010-11. He also submitted that meanwhile, the petitioner was also issued with a charge sheet under Rule 17-a of the (NCS (D&A) Rules, by the Wildlife Warden, Grizzled Squirrel Sanctuary, Srivilliputhur, dated 10.08.2010. The inclusion of the petitioner’s name in the panel for the year 2010-11 was not considered because of the punishment of postponement of increment for one year without cumulative effect which falls the check period of five years. On the above said ground, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 10. Pleadings and materials on record disclose that the crucial date for consideration of names of eligible persons for drawal of panel to the post of Ranger is 15.08.2010. Pleadings further disclose that the writ petition No.11884 of 2009 filed by the petitioner for a direction to include his name in the panel for the year 2009-10, though defended by the Department on the ground that the name of the petitioner did not come within the zone of consideration, came to be disposed of with a direction to the respondents therein to include his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Ranger for the year 2009-10. However, the Department has challenged the said order in W.A.SR.No.5826 of 2011, which is said to be pending. The crucial date for the panel for the year 2010-11 was 15.08.2010. The petitioner has been inflicted with a penalty of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect on 30.11.2006, which expired after completion of one year and the punishment of censure imposed on 28.02.2007 also expired on 31.12.2007. What remains is only a charge memo issued under Rule 17-a of the TNCS (D&A) Rules. It is well settled in W.P.No.32007 of 2005, by order dated 7.3.2006 (K. Thirunavukkarasu v. State of Tamil Nadu and another) and in a Division Bench decision of this Court in W.P.No.11511 of 2002 (K. Selvarajan v. The Secretary to Government, Department of Health camp; Family Welfare, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai-9 and two others), a charge under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, cannot be held as a bar for promotion. Even the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.368, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 18.10.1993, makes it clear that the charge under 17(a) of the above said Rules cannot be held against a Government servant for inclusion in the panel. 11. While considering as to whether the currency of minor punishment can be treated as bar for promotion on the basis of the Government instructions issued from time to time, for preparation of the panel and after analysis of the entire law on the subject, a Full Bench decision of this Court in The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Thanjavur Range v. V. Rani reported in 2011 (3) CTC 129 (stated supra), has answered as follows: “(1) During the period of currency of minor punishment, an employee cannot claim as a matter of right to be promoted to the next category merely on the basis that he is otherwise fit for promotion and to that extent, the finding of the Division Bench in Subramanian v. Government of Tamil Nadu, rep. by its Secretary, Chennai and others, ( 2008 (5) MLJ 350 , stands overruled. It is needless to state that after the currency of punishment period, the Government servant is entitled to be considered for promotion to the next post, if otherwise eligible. (2) If any benefit has been conferred on the party to the Judgment rendered by the Division Bench in Subramanian v. Government of Tamil Nadu rep. It is needless to state that after the currency of punishment period, the Government servant is entitled to be considered for promotion to the next post, if otherwise eligible. (2) If any benefit has been conferred on the party to the Judgment rendered by the Division Bench in Subramanian v. Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary, Chennai and others, 2008 (5) MLJ 350 , the same shall not be affected by the Judgment of this Bench since there is a factual finding in that case that there was a technical lapse committed by the delinquent and no financial loss caused. (3) The detailed instructions issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.368, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 18.10.1993 issued by the Chief Secretary to Government by order of the Governor, cannot be equated to the Statutory Rules framed under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India and it can utmost be Administrative Instructions issued under Article 162 of the Constitution of India. In any event, the said Government Order does not deal with the case of promotion of a Government servant during the currency of punishment. (4) The Government letter No.18824/S/2005-2, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, dated 07.10.2005 with annexures 1 to 7 and the letter Nos.248 (P&AR) Department, dated 20.10.1997 are not Statutory Rules framed under Proviso Article 309 of the Constitution of India and cannot be read either with the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules. (5) Consequently, the embargo put on the right of the Government servant for being considered for promotion for a further period, after the period of minor punishment is over, in the name of ‘check period’ viz., one year in the case of censure and five years in the case of other minor punishments is illegal and impermissible under the statutory rules.” 12. In the above said Judgment, the Hon’ble Full Bench of this Court has made clear that there cannot be any embargo in the right of the Government servant for being considered for promotion for a further period, after the period of minor punishment is over, in the name of ‘check period’ viz., one year in the case of censure and five years in the case of other minor punishments is illegal and impermissible under the statutory rules. 13. 13. Following the Full Bench Decision of this Court, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is entitled for promotion to the post of Forest Ranger for the year 2010-11 with all service and monetary benefits. The impugned panel dated 10.12.2010 denying the selection of the petitioner for the post of Ranger is set aside in so far as the petitioner’s non-inclusion is concerned. Consequently, there shall be a direction to the respondents to include his name in the approved list of Forest Ranger for the year 2010 and promote him to the said post with all service and monetary benefits. The said exercise has to be carried out by the respondent within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 14. The Writ Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.