Judgment : 1. The petitioner has come up with this writ petition challenging the promotion of the third respondent as Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical), in the respondent Corporation, by means of the impugned order. 2. The facts of the case would be as follows: (i) The posts of Assistant Supervisors, Junior Engineers, Assistant Engineers and Assistant Divisional Engineers(Electrical) are all governed by the Madras Corporation Engineering Service Rules, 1969. The petitioner joined as Assistant Supervisor, on 27.11.1989. The qualification essential for such post is diploma in Electrical Engineering. Similarly, the third respondent joined the post of Assistant Supervisor, on 20.3.1990. He also had diploma in Electrical Engineering. Thus, by appointment to the initial posting as Assistant Supervisor, the petitioner was far Senior to the third respondent. (ii) The next promotion for both of them was to the post of Junior Engineer. The petitioner was promoted as Junior Engineer, on 21.6.1995. The third respondent was also promoted as Junior Engineer on the same day. As a matter of fact, both were promoted, by means of a common order passed by the then Commissioner of Madras Corporation, in E1.D.C.No.A1/3289/94, dated 21.6.1995. Thus, in the post of Junior Engineer also, the petitioner was far Senior to the third respondent. (iii) The next avenue of promotion for both of them was to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical). As per the Madras Corporation Engineering Service Rules, 1969, the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer (Electrical) can be filled up by direct recruitment as well as promotion. (iii) The next avenue of promotion for both of them was to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical). As per the Madras Corporation Engineering Service Rules, 1969, the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer (Electrical) can be filled up by direct recruitment as well as promotion. The said Rule reads as follows: Class, Category & name of Post Method of appointment Qualification Assistant Divisional Engineer (Electrical) By direct Recruitment (1)Must not have completed or will not complete 30 years of age on the 1st day of July of the year in which the selection for appointment is made; (2)Must possess a Degree in Electrical Engineering of any University or Institution recognized by the University Grants Commission for purposes of its grant; and (3)Must have had practical experience in factory, Workshop or Electrical understanding for a period of not less than three years By promotion or by appointment on deputation 1.(a) A degree in Electrical Engineering of any University or Institution recognized by the University Grants Commission for purpose of its grant or any others qualification considered equivalent thereto and in the case or promotion service as Assistant Engineer in the Corporation Engineering Subordinate service for a period not less than five years or (G.O.Ms.No.907, RD and LA dt.20.05.1981) (b)Diploma in Electrical Engineering of the State Board of Technical Education and Training or any other qualifications considered equivalent thereto and a minimum period of service and experience of 15 years; or (c)Subject to the conditions specified below a pass in Sec.A and B of the A.M.I.E.(Ind.) Examination with Electrical Engineering (General)and any two of the following subjects under Section B as optional or additional subjects: i.Electric supply and power distribution. ii.Electrical Machinery. Iii.Electrical Installation. iv.Electrical Measurements. v.Thermodynamics and Head Engines (Steam and Internal Combustion) vi.Hydro Electricity; and vii.Hydraulics or Hydraulic Machinery (iv) Factually, the third respondent, while in service, had completed Bachelor of Engineering course and obtained B.E. degree on 8.5.1995. Therefore, the third respondent was re-designated as Assistant Engineer from 8.5.1995. It needs to be mentioned that those officers, who possess only diploma are designated as Junior Engineers, whereas, those who held B.E.degree are designated as Assistant Engineers. (v) In the year 2013, there arose nine vacancies for the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical). According to the petitioner, in the seniority list, he was in 10th place. One candidate, by name, M.Sundaramurthy, who was in the sixth place, relinquished his promotion. (v) In the year 2013, there arose nine vacancies for the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical). According to the petitioner, in the seniority list, he was in 10th place. One candidate, by name, M.Sundaramurthy, who was in the sixth place, relinquished his promotion. Therefore, as against the ninth vacancy, according to the petitioner, he should have been promoted. But to his surprise, according to him, the third respondent, who was in the 12th place in the seniority list, was promoted as Assistant Divisional Engineer, by bringing him to the third place in the seniority list. Thus, according to the petitioner, instead of promoting him, the third respondent has been unduly promoted and that is why he is aggrieved. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the eligibility criteria for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer for diploma holders, namely, Junior Engineers, is 15 years of service in the Corporation service. The petitioner had completed 15 years of service, as Assistant Supervisor and Junior Engineer put together, in the year 2004 itself. Therefore, from 27.11.2004, he is eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer. 4. So far as the third respondent is concerned, according to him, he was promoted by having regard to the fact that he had completed five years of experience as Assistant Engineer. According to him, he became eligible for promotion, on completion of five years of service as Assistant Engineer, on 8.5.2000 itself. Thus, according to the respondents, going by the date of eligibility of the third respondent for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer, he became eligible as early as, on 8.5.2000, whereas, the petitioner became eligible only on 27.11.2004. Therefore, according to the respondents, the third respondent was promoted and not the petitioner as against the ninth vacancy. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the method as to how the total period of service is to be calculated for the purpose of promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer is no more res integra. According to him, a Division Bench of this Court had an occasion to consider the said issue in W.A.Nos.255 and 651 of 2005 in V.Kuppan and others vs. P.Murali and others. In that case, decided on 20.8.2007, the Division Bench in paragraph No.13 has held as follows: "13. . . . . According to him, a Division Bench of this Court had an occasion to consider the said issue in W.A.Nos.255 and 651 of 2005 in V.Kuppan and others vs. P.Murali and others. In that case, decided on 20.8.2007, the Division Bench in paragraph No.13 has held as follows: "13. . . . . .From the perusal of the above said rule it is amply clear that for the Diploma Holders in Electrical Engineering of the state board of Technical Education and Training or any other qualifications considered equivalent thereto, a minimum 15 years of service is required and for the Degree Holders in Electrical Engineer not less than five years of experience as Assistant Engineer, in the Corporation Engineering subordinate service is required. Nowhere in the said rule it is stipulated that 15 years of service is required for the diploma holders after they were designated as Junior Engineers. When the rule is very clear and the corporation having acted upon on the basis of the rule as could be seen from the counter affidavit filed by the corporation placing the respondents 3 to 5 who are appellants in W.A.No.255 of 2005 in the panel for promotion for the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical) by seniority from the post of Junior Engineer(Electrical) by seniority from the post of Junior Engineer(Electrical) no exception could be taken by the petitioners, who are Degree Holders." 6. Referring to the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that so far as the petitioner is concerned, since he had acquired the qualification for promotion in 2004 and since the ninth vacancy arose only in 2013, the petitioner should have been promoted. 7. The Joint Commissioner (Works), Corporation of Chennai, has filed a detailed counter, wherein, the above factual aspects are not disputed. The crux of the counter is that the crucial date for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical) is the date on which a candidate becomes eligible for promotion by putting in the required number of years of service either as diploma holder or as degree holder. In this case, admittedly the third respondent became eligible as early as, on 8.5.2000; whereas, the petitioner became eligible only on 27.11.2004. Therefore, the third respondent was duly considered above the petitioner and he was promoted. 8. The learned counsel for the third respondent also adopted the said stand and opposed the writ petition. In this case, admittedly the third respondent became eligible as early as, on 8.5.2000; whereas, the petitioner became eligible only on 27.11.2004. Therefore, the third respondent was duly considered above the petitioner and he was promoted. 8. The learned counsel for the third respondent also adopted the said stand and opposed the writ petition. 9. The learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for respondents 1 and 2, would submit that the petitioner cannot claim that he is Senior to the third respondent, as going by the date of eligibility for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer, the petitioner is far junior to the third respondent. Therefore, the order of promotion of the third respondent as Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical) cannot be interfered with, the Additional Advocate General contended. 10. But the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the crucial date cannot be the date on which a person becomes eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical). According to him, the crucial date shall be the date on which the vacancy had arisen or the date on which the panel is drawn. In this case, if either one is taken into account, since it fell only in the year 2013, the petitioner was eligible for promotion, as he was senior to the third respondent on the said crucial date. 11. I have considered the above submissions. 12. As has been held by the Division Bench, the total number of 15 yeas of service required for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical) need not be 15 years of service, as Junior Engineer. The Division Bench has clearly held that it is the total period of service put in both as Assistant Supervisor and the Junior Engineer. Thus, admittedly, the petitioner became eligible for promotion, on 27.11.2004. The third respondent obtained degree in Engineering only, on 8.5.1995. From that date, if he is to complete five years, he would become eligible, on 8.5.2000. But, the vacancy, against which the promotion was made, did not fall prior to 27.11.2004, so to say that before 27.11.2004, the petitioner was not eligible for promotion; whereas, the third respondent was eligible for promotion. From that date, if he is to complete five years, he would become eligible, on 8.5.2000. But, the vacancy, against which the promotion was made, did not fall prior to 27.11.2004, so to say that before 27.11.2004, the petitioner was not eligible for promotion; whereas, the third respondent was eligible for promotion. To put it otherwise, suppose the vacancy had arisen somewhere in the year 2001, 2002 or 2003, i.e. prior to 27.11.2004, quite naturally the third respondent would have been promoted and the petitioner would not have been promoted. In such an event, the petitioner would not have had any grievance at all. But admittedly, the vacancy arose only in the year 2013. As on the date on which the vacancy arose, the petitioner had completed 15 years of service and thus, he was also eligible. There was no re-arrangement of seniority. Based on the date of eligibility also, the petitioner continued to be the Senior to the third respondent. If the date of drawl of panel is taken into account as a crucial date, even on that date, the petitioner was eligible and he was Senior to the third respondent. At any rate, the petitioner should have been promoted and not the third respondent. In such view of the matter, the impugned order of promotion, promoting the third respondent as Assistant Divisional Engineer(Electrical) needs to be interfered with and there should be a direction issued by this Court to promote the petitioner as Assistant Divisional Engineer with effect from 23.1.2014. 13. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order to the extent it has promoted the third respondent is set aside and respondents 1 and 2 are directed to promote the petitioner as Assistant Divisional Engineer (Electrical) with effect from 23.1.2014. It is further directed that consequential order shall be issued by respondents 1 and 2 within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.