Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 403 (MAD)

S. Nirmala v. State of Tamil Nadu

2014-02-20

R.SUBBIAH

body2014
Judgment 1. Mr. R. Vijayakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice for the respondents. By consent of the learned counsel on either side, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing respondents 1 to 4 to place the petitioner, over and above the fifth respondent, in the panel, dated 04.02.2014, and select the petitioner for promotion to the post of Associate Professor of Microbiology in preference to the fifth respondent, as the petitioner is more meritorious and has completed the probation even before two months from the date of completion of the fifth respondent and promote her to the said post with all monetary and service benefits. 3. The brief facts, in nut-shell, which are necessary for the disposal of the above writ petition, are as follows:- The petitioner, who is a Post Graduate in Microbiology and working as a Senior Assistant Professor, has been claiming for seniority, over and above the fifth respondent herein, as she was on Extraordinary Leave, on Medical Certificate, on loss of pay, for two months and completed her probation only after the petitioner. Further, the petitioner claims that she is more meritorious, as she is in-charge of AIDS and HIV Center for the State, which has got three stars, because of the petitioner's services, whereas the fifth respondent has not got such meritorious service to her credit. Because of the Extraordinary Leave on medical certificate, on loss of pay for 90 days, the fifth respondent has lost her seniority and she has to be placed after the petitioner in the seniority list. But the respondents, without taking note of the above mentioned aspect, have notified the panel for further promotion to the post of Associate Professor and in that, the fifth respondent has been placed at S.No.2, whereas the petitioner is at S.No.4. Therefore, the petitioner has made a representation, dated 06.02.2014, for revision of seniority to the third respondent to be forwarded to the second respondent, but till date no order is passed on the said representation. In the meanwhile, the first respondent has notified the panel for promotion to the post of Associate Professor in G.O.(D) No.83, dated 27.01.2014 and in that, the petitioner has been placed at S.No.4, whereas the fifth respondent is at S.No.2. In the meanwhile, the first respondent has notified the panel for promotion to the post of Associate Professor in G.O.(D) No.83, dated 27.01.2014 and in that, the petitioner has been placed at S.No.4, whereas the fifth respondent is at S.No.2. Therefore, the petitioner has submitted another representation, dated 14.02.2014, in the office of the second respondent, in person. As the counselling is scheduled to be held in a short while, the petitioner has come up before this Court, seeking the above said relief. 4. I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 5. Though this writ petition has been filed to direct respondents 1 to 4 to place the petitioner, over and above the fifth respondent, in the panel, dated 04.02.2014, and select the petitioner for promotion to the post of Associate Professor of Microbiology in preference to the fifth respondent and promote her to the said post with all monetary and service benefits, this Court is not inclined to give such a positive direction. However, from the typed set of papers enclosed, I find that the petitioner has made a representation, dated 06.02.2014, before the second respondent. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court is constrained to pass the following order:- The petitioner is hereby directed to submit a copy of the representation, dated 06.02.2014, along with necessary enclosures, to the second respondent within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, along with this order copy. On receipt of the same, the second respondent is directed to consider the said representation and pass appropriate orders on it, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from the date of submitting the representation by the petitioner. It is needless to say that any decision taken in the counselling is subject to the result of the appeal, which is to be decided by the first respondent. 6. With the above directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected MP is closed.