ORDER : M. DHANDAPANI, J. The writ petitions have been filed seeking to quash G.O.(2D) No.07 dated 11.03.2024 and the consequential order and seniority list and to direct the respondents to revise the seniority list on the basis of merit in the light of in Cont. Pet.(Civil).No.(s) 6415 of 2021 in SLP (C) No. 2886 of 2016 dated 18.04.2023 and W.P.Nos.4835 and 25824 of 2022 dated 20.02.2024. 2.Since the issue involved in these writ petitions are common in nature, they are heard together and disposed of by way of a common order. 3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners were selected and appointed to the post of Veterinary Assistant Surgeon through TNPSC in the year 1999 – 2000, 1998 – 1999, 1998 – 1999, 1999 – 2000 and 1999 – 2000 respectively, and common appointment orders were issued by the Director of Animal Husbandry Department on 12.11.2001, 24.10.2000, 24.10.2000, 12.11.2001 and 12.11.2001 respectively, and their services were regularized and probation was also declared. Till the impugned seniority list was prepared by the respondents, no seniority list was prepared by the respondents on roster system. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further submitted that similarly situated persons filed W.P.Nos.34281 of 2019 etc batch and this Court disposed of the said writ petitions on 20.02.2020 by directing the respondents therein to proceed to give promotion in accordance with the finalized seniority list and thereafter seniority list was prepared on merit basis. Subsequently, petitioners seniority list was not prepared in terms of merit basis and aggrieved by the same the petitioners have filed these writ petitions. 5.The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the third respondent submitted that for non fixation of seniority on the basis of merit, there were several litigations instituted before this Court, thereby the official respondents landed in contempt and ultimately, the Hon’ble Apex Court also clearly held and directed the State Government to prepare the seniority list on the basis of merit and also made it clear that if any list is given, all those persons selected as per the seniority or as per merits, the same shall not be disturbed. In view of the categorical finding rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the seniority list in the present case cannot be disturbed. The impugned seniority list was published on merits. In view of the categorical finding rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the seniority list in the present case cannot be disturbed. The impugned seniority list was published on merits. Such a revision of seniority cannot be deferred. 6.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record. 7.The petitioners are recruited as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon between 1998 – 1999 and 1999 – 2000. The grievance of the petitioners is that the impugned seniority list is not published on merits and it is published on roster system, on the basis of the register maintained by TNPSC and aggrieved by the same, the petitioners have filed these writ petitions. 8.The very same issue has already been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) Diary No(s). 6415/2021 IN SLP(C) No.2886/2016 [P.Madhu Vs. K.Nanthakumar] dated 18.04.2023 , the relevant portion of which is extracted hereunder: 20. If the State has the will to do, it can very well comply with the orders passed by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court and affirmed by this Court. 21. We therefore, direct the State Government to complete the exercise of finalizing the seniority lists of selection processes conducted after 10th March, 2003 on the basis of the principle that the seniority list shall be reckoned only on the basis of the merit as determined by the TNPSC in the selection process. 22. It is further made clear that if any list is finalized in case of selections held prior to 2003 giving benefit to the persons selected as per their seniority or as per merit, the same shall also not to be disturbed. 23. Needless to state that if this exercise is not completed within a period of three months from today, we will consider re-opening of the contempt proceedings.” 9.The decision cited supra makes it clear that if the State has the will to do, it can very well comply with the orders passed by the Division Bench of the Madras High Court and affirmed by this Court. If any list is finalized in case of selections held prior to 2003 giving benefit to the persons selected as per their seniority or as per merit, the same shall also not to be disturbed. If any list is finalized in case of selections held prior to 2003 giving benefit to the persons selected as per their seniority or as per merit, the same shall also not to be disturbed. 10.Applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the decision cited supra, this Court is of the opinion that these writ petitions are mis-conceived and are liable to be dismissed. 11.The writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.