Allowed

P.Subbaiyan v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC14 Nov 2011WP/13713/2006

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a writ petition filed by a retired Grade-I Librarian. The court held that since his juniors were promoted retrospectively despite a prior punishment imposed on the petitioner, the petitioner was entitled to promotion benefits from the date of the juniors' promotion. The respondents were directed to pay consequential benefits and revise terminal benefits.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to receive Grade-I Librarian monetary benefits from 19.04.1999 till date of retirement and revise terminal benefits.

P.Subbaiyan Vs the State of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 14.11.2011

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

¶5

W.P.NO.13713 OF 2006 (O.A.NO.6202 OF 2002)

¶6

P.Subbaiyan ... Petitioner
VS.
1.State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Commissioner and Secretary
to Government
Education Department
Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of Public Libraries
Mount Road, Chennai – 600 002.
3.The District Library Officer
Thanjavur District, Thanjavur. ... Respondents

¶7

PRAYER: This writ petition came to be numbered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by way of transfer of Original Application in O.A.No.6202 of 2002 from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer to direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as Grade – I Librarian and fix his seniority in the appropriate place with consequential monetary benefits.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Subbaiyan Party – in – Person For Respondents: Mr.V.Subbiah Special Government Pleader O R D E R Heard both sides.

¶9

2.The petitioner was appointed as Record Clerk in 1966. He was promoted as Assistant Librarian in 1970. Later, he was promoted as Grade – II Librarian and further promoted as Grade–I Librarian in the year 2002. He retired from service on 30.09.2002. The grievance of the petitioner is that his juniors namely Mr.K.Nagarajan, who

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

joined service on 20.11.1973 and Mr.T.Jayabal, who joined service on 31.12.1970 subsequent to him were granted promotion as Grade–I Librarian on 08.06.1999 and 19.04.1999 retrospectively. According to the petitioner, there was no impediment for promoting him to the post of Grade–I Librarian, when his juniors were promoted. Hence, he filed Original Application in O.A.No.6202 of 2002 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer to direct the respondents to promote him as Grade–I Librarian and fix his seniority in the appropriate place with consequential monetary benefits.

¶12

3.The respondents filed counter affidavit refuting the allegations made by the petitioner. It is stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner was imposed with a punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect, by the District Library Officer, Thanjavur, by an order dated 04.12.1997 and the same was modified into that of stoppage of increment for six months without cumulative effect, by an dated 22.10.1998 of the second respondent. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled for promotion to the post of Grade–I Librarian from the date on which his juniors were promoted. In this regard, the respondents relied on a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.368, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 18.10.1993 in the counter affidavit.

¶13

4.In view of the abolition of the Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court and was renumbered as W.P.No.13713 of 2006.

¶14

5.In my view, when Mr.K.Nagarajan and Mr.T.Jayabal were promoted as Grade – I Librarians on 08.06.1999 and 19.04.1999 respectively, there was no impediment for the respondents for giving promotion to the petitioner. The earlier order dated 04.12.1997 imposing punishment on the petitioner, could not be cited as the impediment, since the juniors of the petitioner were given promotion subsequent to the punishment imposed on the petitioner. It is also relevant to note that Mr.K.Nagarajan was directly promoted as Grade–I Librarian from the post of Grade–III Librarian, without being promoted as Grade–II Librarian, as per the information furnished by the Department under the RTI Act to the petitioner.

¶15

6.In these circumstances, the petitioner is entitled to get promotion as Grade–I Librarian from the date on which his immediate junior Mr.Jayabal was promoted. Since the petitioner was already retired from service, the respondents are directed to pay the petitioner the benefits payable to Grade–I Librarian, from 19.04.1999 till the date of his retirement on 30.09.2002 and also revise his terminal benefits, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

7.The writ petition is ordered in the above terms. No

¶18

costs.

¶19

Sd/
Asst. Registrar
/true copy/
Sub Asst.Registrar
TK
To
1. The Commissioner and Secretary to Government
Government of Tamil Nadu
Education Department
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director of Public Libraries
Mount Road,
Chennai – 600 002.
3. The District Library Officer
Thanjavur District,
Thanjavur.
1 cc To Mr.P.Subbaiyan, Advocate, SR.69604
1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.69501
W.P.NO.13713 OF 2006
(O.A.NO.6202 OF 2002)
KJI(CO)
RH (25.11.11)

¶20

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

P.Subbaiyan v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Subbaiyan v. the State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M.Raman Vs Govt of Tamilnadu

P.Srinivasan Vs the State of Tamilnadu

S.Umamaheshwari W/O.S.Dhanapal Vs Jt Director of Medical

K.Selvaraj Vs the District Collector

K. Thangaraju Vs the Secretary Tamilnadu

Thiru.K.Srinivasan Vs the Secretary Regional