N. Natrayansamy Vs Government of Tamilnadu — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

N. Natrayansamy Vs Government of Tamilnadu — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2017)

1

RESERVED ON :20.04.2017

DELIVERED ON : 03.11.2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 03.11.2017

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR

W.P.Nos.18951, 18952, 18953 & 25066 of 2011 and M.P.Nos 1 to 1 (4 Mps) & 2 to 2 (3 Mps) of 2011 & M.P.Nos.1 to 1 (3Mps) of 2015

N.Natrayansamy .. Petitioner in W.P.Nos.18951/11
1. I.Richard
2. K.Kirubakaran .. Petitioners in W.P.Nos.18952/11
1. B.Sivakuamr
2. N.Saravanan
3. R.Palanivel .. Petitioners in W.P.Nos.18953/11
1. B.Sivakumar
2. N.Saravanan
3. R.Palanivel
4.N.Natrayansamy
5. I.Richard
6.K.Kirubahar .. Petitioners in W.P.Nos.25066/11
Vs.
1. Government of Tamilnadu
Rep. by its Principal Secretary
Municipal Administration and
Water Supply Department.
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.

http://www.judis.nic.in

2

The Commissioner, Erode City Municipal Corporation, Erode – 638 001. ... Respondents in all the WPs

The Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit, O/o, Erode City Municipal Corporation, Erode – 638 001.

... Respondent in W.P.Nos.18951 to 18953/11

Prayer in W.P.No.18951 /2011 :Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order G.O.Ms.No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (Ma.Na.6) Department, dated 22.10.2008 passed by the 1st respondent in so far as the petitioners concerned in grouping their posts alone and the consequential reversion order in Na. Ka. No.C1/18577/2008 dated 23.5.2011 passed by the 2nd respondent and the audit objection report dated 14.3.2011 and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the 1st respondent to reschedule the category of Electrician Grade I post to Technical Assistant in G.O.Ms. No. 206 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (Ma. Na. 6) Department dated 22.10.2008 and to direct the 2nd respondent to restore the petitioner to his original post as Technical Assistant in the 2^nd respondent Corporation with effect from 16.09.2009.

Prayer in W.P.No.18952 /2011 :Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order in Na. Ka.No.C1/18577/2008 dated 26.5.2011 passed by the 2nd respondent and the audit objection report dated 14.3.2011 and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to restore the petitioner to his original post as Technical Assistant in the 2nd respondent Corporation with effect from 16.9.2009

Prayer in W.P.No.18953 /2011 :Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the

http://www.judis.nic.in

3

impugned order G.O.Ms.No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (Ma.Na.6) Department, dated 22.10.2008 passed by the 1st respondent in so far as the petitioners concerned in grouping their posts alone and the consequential reversion order in Na. Ka. No.C1/18577/2008 dated 23.5.2011 passed by the 2nd respondent and the audit objection report dated 14.3.2011 and quash the same in so far as the petitioner is concerned and consequently direct the 1st respondent to reschedule the category of Wireman post to Skilled Assistant Grade-I post in G.O.Ms. No. 206 Municipal Administration and Water Supply (Ma. Na. 6) Department dated 22.10.2008 and to direct the 2nd respondent to restore the petitioner to his original post as Technical Assistants in the 2^nd respondent Corporation with effect from 16.09.2009.

Prayer in W.P.No.25066 /2011 :Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the 2nd respondent from awarding promotions to the newly inducted staffs of the local bodies to the Erode Corporation as per G.O.Ms.No.51 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 17.03.2010 and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to prepare the promotion panel for the post of Junior Engineer in the 2nd respondent Corporation by following the G.O.Ms.No.56, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 01.04.2008.

For Petitioners in all WPs : Mr.G.Sankaran for Mr.P.Rajavel For R1 in all WPs : Mr.A.Zakir Hussain Govt. Advocate For R2 W.P.No.25066/11 : Mr.M.Raja Mathivanan For R2 & R3 in W.P.Nos. 18951 to 18953/11 : Mr. P. Srinivas

http://www.judis.nic.in

4

COMMON ORDER

In all these writ petitions, the issue raised by the respective petitioners is one and the same and the prayer sought for is either

same or similar, therefore, with the consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties, all these writ petitions are disposed of by

this common order.

appointed as Electrician Grade-II in the second respondent corporation on 22.11.1991. After completing ten years of service, he received selection grade scale of pay and further he was promoted to Electrician Grade-I post on 15.09.2005. While so, the State Government issued

an Ordinance No.7 of 2007 by which the second respondent, which was originally a Municipality, was upgraded as Municipal Corporation

with effect from 01.01.2008. After the upgradation of the second respondent corporation, Government issued G.O.(Ms).No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 22.10.2008 for the purpose of grouping of staff pattern and for promotion and creation of additional post at the second respondent

http://www.judis.nic.in

5

corporation. The said G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 for the said service purposes was issued based on the service rule already issued by the State Government through Government Order in G.O.(Ms).No.237, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 26.9.1996.

(ii) On the basis of the aforesaid two Government Orders, the petitioner had claimed grouping of his post of Electrician Grade-I to the post called Technical Assistant. The second respondent having considered the said request of the petitioner and after taking note of the import of the said rule issued under the Government Order referred to above, issued orders on 16.09.2009 grouping the petitioner's post of Electrician Grade-I as Technical Assistant.

(iii) Thereafter the petitioner had given requests to the second respondent on 09.10.2009, 07.12.2009, 04.02.2010 and 18.02.2010 to promote him to the next higher post i.e, Junior Engineer as per the said Rule, namely, G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996, and the same, according to the petitioner, was not considered and was kept pending. It is also the claim of the petitioner that due to the seniority, as the petitioner had been in selection grade scale of pay, he was grouped as

http://www.judis.nic.in

6

Technical Assistant from 16.9.2009 and had been working as such.

(iv) It is the further claim of the petitioner that he had completed Diploma in Electrical Engineering and Diploma in Civil Engineering. Therefore, he claimed that he is having the qualification to be considered for the post of Junior Engineer.

(v) While the matter stood thus, the third respondent, i.e, the Local Fund Audit seems to have raised an objection regarding the groupings of postings undertaken by the second respondent corporation in its audit report dated 14.3.2011. The sum and substance of the objections raised by the third respondent was that, the said grouping done by the second respondent corporation whereby the petitioner's post, namely, Electrician Grade-I was wrongly grouped to Technical Assistant. According to the audit report, the Electrician Grade-I should have only been grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-I as envisaged under G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 which was specifically issued for the service regularisation and grouping of posts at second respondent corporation.

(vi) In the said audit objection, the third respondent also had indicated / directed the second respondent corporation to revert the

http://www.judis.nic.in

7

petitioner from the post of Technical Assistant to the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I and accordingly, fix the pay and also directed that if any excess salary / pay was paid to the petitioner, that shall also be recovered.

(vii) In pursuant to the the audit objection and directive issued by the third respondent, the second respondent / Municipal Corporation issued an order dated 23.5.2011, whereby the petitioner has been reverted to the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I from the post of Technical Assistant. Aggrieved by the said order of reversion, dated 23.5.2011 issued by the second respondent, pursuant to the audit objection and directive issued by the third respondent, the petitioner filed this writ petition challenging the Government Order in G.O.(Ms).No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 22.10.2008, the impugned audit objection and directive dated 14.3.2011 issued by the third respondent and the consequential impugned reversion order dated 23.5.2011 issued by the second respondent.

(viii) W.P.No.18952 of 2011:

The petitioners herein, namely, I.Richard and K.Kirubakaran (Petitioner No.1 and Petitioner No.2) joined at the second respondent

http://www.judis.nic.in

8

corporation on 21.4.1987 and 06.07.1992 as NMR Electrician Grade-II as at that time, the second respondent was only a Municipality. These petitioners had been made permanent in the post of Electrician GradeII on 24.5.2006. After the upgradation of the second respondent into Corporation by virtue of ordinance No. 7 of 2007 from 01.01.2008 and

the consequential issuance of G.O.(Ms).No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 22.10.2008, these petitioners, who had been working as Electrician Grade-II had been

grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-II, on 16.9.2009.

(ix) Thereafter, on the further request of these petitioners, the second respondent had promoted these petitioners as Technical Assistant from 09.10.2009. Accordingly, these two petitioners had been working as Technical Assistants from 09.10.2009 onwards.

(x) It is the claim of these petitioners that they have completed Diploma in Electrical Engineering and Diploma in Mechanical Engineering and based on these qualifications only they had been considered to the said promotional post of Technical Assistant.

(xi) While the matter stood thus, here also, based on the audit

http://www.judis.nic.in

9

objection and directive dated 14.3.2011 issued by the third respondent, the second respondent has passed a reversion order, dated 26.5.2011, whereby these petitioners had been reverted from the post of Technical Assistant to the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-II and the said reversion, according to the said order dated 26.5.2011, would have the retrospective effect from 16.09.2009, the date on which they had originally been grouped and promoted as Skilled Assistant Grade-II.

(xii) Aggrieved over the said order of the second respondent,

dated 26.5.2011, these petitioners, in this writ petition, have challenged the audit objection and directive issued by the third respondent dated 14.3.2011 as well as the consequential reversion order of the second respondent, dated 26.5.2011.

(xiii) W.P.No.18953 of 2011:

This writ petition has been filed by three petitioners, namely, B.Sivkumar, N.Saravanan and R.Palanivel (Petitioner No.1, Petitioner No.2 and Petitioner No.3). All these writ petitioners were appointed as Wiremen in the second respondent's corporation on 20.12.1989 when it was a Municipality. After the second respondent / Municipality was

http://www.judis.nic.in

10

upgraded as Municipal Corporation by Ordinance No.7 of 2007 with effect from 01.01.2008, the Government issued G.O.(Ms).No.206 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 22.10.2008 for staff pattern, promotion, creation of additional post etc. Based on the service rule issued in G.O.Ms.No.237, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 26.9.1996 as well as G.O.(Ms).No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 22.10.2008, these petitioners seem to have claimed grouping of their post of Wireman to Skilled Assistant Grade-I. Considering the said request of these petitioners, the second respondent Corporation grouped the post of Wireman of these petitioners as Skilled Assistant Grade-I from 16.9.2009.

(xiv) It seems that these petitioners had further requested the second respondent / Corporation to give further promotion to the post of Technical Assistant, the second respondent Corporation considering the seniority of these petitioners as they had already reached the selection grade scale of pay, had granted the promotion to the post of Technical Assistant to these petitioners on 09.10.2009. Therefore, these petitioners had been working as Technical Assistant from 09.10.2009 at the second respondent / Corporation.

http://www.judis.nic.in

11

(xv) It is also the claim of the petitioners that all these petitioners had completed Diploma in Electrical Engineering and they are undergoing B.Tech Engineering Courses.

(xvi) While the matter stood thus, based on the audit objections and directives issued by the third respondent on 14.3.2011, the second respondent Corporation had issued an order of reversion, dated 23.5.2011, whereby the petitioners had been reverted from the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I to the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-II and it was also ordered in the impugned order of reversion that this reversion would have a retrospective effect from 16.9.2009. Aggrieved over the said order of reversion, these petitioners have come out with this writ petition with the prayer of certiorified mandamus challenging the G.O.(Ms).No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 22.10.2008, the impugned audit report and directive dated 14.3.2011 issued by the third respondent as well as the consequential impugned reversion order dated 23.5.2011 issued by the second respondent / corporation.

(xvii) W.P.No.25066 of 2011:

http://www.judis.nic.in

12

This writ petition has been filed jointly by six persons, who are none other than the writ petitioners in the aforesaid three writ petitions. This writ petition was filed during the pendency of the aforesaid three writ petitions. Here, these petitioners have sought for a writ of mandamus forbearing the second respondent / Municipal Corporation from awarding any promotions to the newly inducted staffs at the second respondent / corporation as per G.O.(Ms).No.51, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 17.3.2010 and also sought for a consequential prayer of direction to the second respondent to prepare the promotion panel for the post of Junior Engineer in the second respondent / corporation by following the G.O.(Ms).No.56, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 01.04.2008. Since this prayer in this writ petition by all these petitioners, are only consequential in nature, the other facts which led them to file this writ petition need not be traversed in this writ petition as the same have been provided in the other writ petitions.

3. Counter of the second respondent / Municipal Corporation:

(i) Opposing the prayer sought for in the first three writ petitions

http://www.judis.nic.in

13

i.e., W.P.Nos.18951 to 18953 of 2011 and repudiating the averments contained in the respective affidavits filed in support of those writ petitions, the second respondent / Municipal Corporation has filed separate counter affidavits in each of those three writ petitions. The sum and substance of these counter affidavits filed by the second respondent are as follows:

(ii) In respect of the petitioner in W.P.No.18951 of 2011, it is averred in the counter that, he was working as Technical Assistant in Erode City Municipal Corporation from 16.09.2009 and subsequently, he was reverted as Skilled Assistant Grade-I. Insofar as W.P.No.18952 of 2011 is concerned, it is averred in the counter that the petitioners in that writ petition were working as Technical Assistant in Erode City Municipal Corporation from 09.10.2009 and they were reverted as Skilled Assistant Grade-II by orders of the second respondent dated 23.05.2011. Insofar as W.P.No.18953 of 2011 is concerned, it is averred in the counter of the second respondent that the petitioners in this writ petition were appointed as Wiremen in the second respondent / corporation on 20.12.1989, when it was a municipality and after its upgradation based on G.O.(Ms).No.237 dated 26.9.1996, groupings were made and the post of Wireman was converted / created as

http://www.judis.nic.in

14

Skilled Assistant Gr-I and accordingly, they were posted as Skilled Assistant Grade-I on 16.09.2009. However, the second respondent had reverted these petitioners from Skilled Assistant Grade-I to Skilled Assistant Grade-II by order dated 23.5.2011.

(iii) It is further averred in the counter that these orders dated 23.5.2011 and 26.5.2011 were issued only pursuant to the audit objections as well as the directives issued by the Local Fund Audit on 14.3.2011.

(iv) The counter also proceeds to state and extract the objections raised by the Local Fund Audit in their objections cum directives dated 14.3.2011. However, at paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit, the second respondent has averred as follows:

“9. Thiru R.Chinnadurai who was working

as “ Fitter Grade-II” was eligible for redesignation as “ Skilled Assistant Grade-II”.

Tvl. E.Vijaya Gopal and N.Natrayanasamy who were originally working as “ Electrician Grade-I” are eligible for re-designation as “ Technical Assistant” which is in order.

As far as Tvl.B. Sivakumar, N.Saravanan, R.Palanivel, Thiru S.Selvaraj and

http://www.judis.nic.in

15

A.M.Thangaraj are concerned, they were working as “Wiremen” which is to be redesignated as “Skilled Assistant Grade-II” according to G.O.(Ms).No.206, M.A & W.S. Department, dated 22.10.2008.

Therefore, their appointment as Technical Assistant is not proper and not in order accordance with the Tamil Nadu Municipal Corporation Service Rules issued in G.O.(Ms).No.237, M.A. & W.S. Department, dated 26.9.96.

Further, the persons who are not possessing Diploma in Civil Engineering cannot be considered for promotion as Technical Assistant as prescribed under the Rules.”

(v) It is further averred in this counter affidavit that, in view of the audit objections, the second respondent had undertaken the work of correcting the wrong designation of post and accordingly, such orders of reversion was issued and since these petitioners do not have any vested right to be considered for the post of Technical Assistant, cannot seek to stick on the same by claiming technicalities and the challenge made by these petitioners to G.O.(Ms).No.206 dated 22.10.2008, is highly belated and not maintainable as the same has been implemented by passing of time. It is also averred in the counter

http://www.judis.nic.in

16

that, since the re-designation was given initially, violating the service rules under G.O.(Ms).No.237 dated 26.9.1996, the prayer sought for herein in all these writ petitions, by the respective petitioners, are not maintainable and therefore, they are liable to be dismissed.

4. Counter filed by the third respondent:

(i) The third respondent i.e., the Assistant Director of Local Fund

Audit, Erode has filed separate counters for those three writ petitions i.e., W.P.Nos.18951 to 18953 of 2011. In all these separate counters, the third respondent has almost given similar averments. The third respondent has stated in their counter that, while merging the post, the Government Order in G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 was not followed by the second respondent / corporation and therefore, the said violation on the part of the second respondent corporation, was pointed out in the audit objection.

(ii) It is further averred in the counter that in any case of establishment matters, if the service rules and Government Orders are not followed by the Administration, that can be pointed out by the audit department and it is rationale and sustainable in law.

http://www.judis.nic.in

17

(iii) It is also averred in the counter, especially in the counter in W.P.No.18951 of 2011 that, while merging Electrician Grade-I with one step jump to Technical Assistant, though there is no monetary loss to Municipal Corporation, it was pointed out by the audit department that, the service rules were not strictly followed as per G.O.(Ms).No.206 dated 22.10.2008 which was exclusively issued for the second respondent / Municipal Corporation. It is further averred in the counter that, even though there is no monetary loss to the 2^nd respondent, since the merger of post is not done in accordance with the rules, it is the duty of the audit team to point out such lapses. The audit objection was mainly raised on the fact that, the service rules and Government Orders were not strictly adhered to and therefore, the same was objected to, by the audit team.

I have heard Mr.G.Sankaran, the learned counsel for the petitioners in all these writ petitions, Mr.Raja Mathivanan the learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent / Municipal Corporation in W.P.No.25066/11, Mr. P.Srinivas the learned standing counsel appearing for the second and third respondents in W.P.Nos. 18951 to 18953/2011 and Mr.A.Zakir Hussain, the learned

http://www.judis.nic.in

18

Government Advocate for the first respondent in all these writ petitions.

At the outset, Mr.G.Sankaran, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that even though the import of G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 is under challenge atleast in two writ petitions in this batch, on instructions from the respective petitioners, he would submit that, the petitioners are giving up the challenge to the said Government Order. Therefore, he requested that, the validity of the said Government Order need not be gone into, in these batch of cases. Therefore, the only challenge remains in these writ petitions are pertaining to the impugned audit objection dated 14.3.2011 and consequential impugned orders dated 23.5.2011 and 26.5.2011.

With these aforesaid factual matrices of these batch of cases, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has pointed out that, the service rule was issued governing all municipal corporations except Chennai Corporation, in the said Government Order, namely, G.O.(Ms).No.237 dated 26.9.1996. In the said Government Order, annexure-I and II had been given, wherein, the mandatory guidelines,

http://www.judis.nic.in

19

as to how the categorization of posts have to be undertaken by the municipal corporations, have been envisaged.

In this regard, the learned counsel invited the attention of this

Court to paragraph 3 of annexure I to G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated

26.9.1996 which reads thus:

“(3) GROUPING OF TECHNICAL POSTS IN THE ENGINEERING AND WATERSUPPLY DEPARTMENT:-

All the technical posts in the Engineering and Water Supply Department have been classified in three categories as mentions below:-

(a) Technical Assistant Rs.1350– 2200 - (b) Skilled Assistant(Grade-I) Rs.1100 – 1660 - (c) Skilled Assistant(Grade-II) Rs. 975 – 1500

However, at present there are number of technical posts in different scales of pay and in various designations in the corporations. The commissioners of all these corporations should group all the existing technical posts within the above said three categories only, taking into account their present scales of pay and nature of work. Technicals posts having pay less than the scale of Rs.975 – 1500 may be grouped with posts in the scale of Rs.975 – 1500 similarly posts having scale of pay of more than Rs.975 – 1500 and less than Rs.1100 – 1600 may be grouped with posts in the higher scale of pay of Rs. 1100 – 1600. However all the existing person shall will get their pay in the scales of pay in which they are now getting their pay, till the scales of pay and revised by the next pay commission. Similarly, the posts in other categories may also be grouped and orders issued by all the commissioners.”

The learned counsel would also invite the attention of this

Court to annexure- II of the said Government Order, where the posts

http://www.judis.nic.in

20

called Technical Assistant, Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Skilled Assistant Grade-II in Engineering and Water Supply Service had been specifically mentioned where the following has been given:

ANNEXURE – II

STATEMENT SHOWING THE POSTS PROVIDED IN THE NEW SERVICE RULES, THEIR SCALES OF PAY AND THE POSTS NOW IN EXISTENCE WHICH CAN BE GROUPED THOSE POSTS PROVIDED IN THE RULES

Sl.No Proposed designation of Existing designation of Scale of pay now
posts posts which can grouped proposed
.............. .......................... ............................... ..............................
13. Technical Asst. Drafts man
Electrical Superintendent
Town Planning Draftsman
Water Vehicle Supervisor
Head Work Fitter
Electrician Gr.I 1350-2200
Cinema Operator
Drainage Inspector
Asst. Draftsman
14. Skilled Asst Gr.I Electrician
Fitter
Meter Reader
Work Inspector
Mechanic etc.,
Who are now drawing in 1100 - 1660
the basic pay of above
Rs.975-1500
15. Skilled Asst Gr.II Those who are working in
the scale of pay of 975-
1500 viz., Fitter, Meter
Reader, Road Inspector,
Field Man, etc.,

http://www.judis.nic.in

21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, subsequent to the issuance of G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996, the Government issued further order in G.O.Ms.No.140, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 27.5.1997, wherein, several clarifications, as has been sought for by various municipal corporations, had been clarified / answered by the Government. According to the said clarifications, the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Technical Assistant post need not be filled up for sometime by direct recruitment till all the eligible persons, who have completed 20 years of service as Skilled Assistant Grade-II or even in lower post, are given promotion.

The learned counsel has pointed out that this clarification under G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 was issued, only in order to give preference to the already working persons in various grades, such as Electrician Grade-II, Technical Assistant Grade-II, Wireman and other posts for several years, as, if these long serving persons are not given promotions as a one level jump promotion, they would be in a position to work under a raw hand, who would be appointed as freshers by way of direct recruitment, in these posts.

http://www.judis.nic.in

22

The learned counsel would further submit that, since all these petitioners had been in long service in the second respondent corporation, they had reached the level of selection grade and was drawing the higher scale of pay and also had worked for a number of years in order to suit the criteria indicated in G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, to consider them for the one level jump promotion. These petitioners had been grouped to the newly designated / created posts under G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 and accordingly, they had

been promoted either as Skilled Assistant Grade-I or Technical Assistant.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would also point out

that after having been grouped as such, these petitioners had been working for more than 1 ½ years and only at that juncture, merely because of the audit objection and the directive issued by the third respondent / audit team, the impugned order of reversion was inflicted on these petitioners. It was also urged by the learned counsel for the petitioners that, before issuance of the impugned reversion orders, none of the petitioners have been put on notice and straight away, these impugned orders of reversion have been placed. Therefore, the learned counsel would vehemently contend that, these impugned

http://www.judis.nic.in

23

orders of reversion are liable to be set aside on the ground of violation of the principle of natural justice, as admittedly, no notice has been served on these petitioners, before issuance of the impugned reversion orders.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would also submit that, all these petitioners had completed the Diploma in Engineering courses in their respective field and they are also undergoing UG degree in Engineering, thereby all these petitioners are not only having the required period of experience as clarified under G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, but also having the educational qualification which are considered to be the required or more qualification for the purpose of posting them, as Technical Assistant.

The learned counsel for the petitioner would also point out that, when similar issue arose in respect of Coimbatore Corporation, some of the affected employees had approached this Court by filing writ petitions, and atleast in two such writ petitions, namely, W.P.No.33584 of 2013 filed by one S.Balachander and W.P.No.33585

of 2013 filed by one N.Sakthivel, this Court issued mandamus, after taking into account the relevant Government Orders, especially

http://www.judis.nic.in

24

G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996, G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997

and other relevant Government Orders. Pursuant to the said directive

issued by this Court through the mandamus sought for in those writ petitions, the Coimbatore Corporation has complied with the orders of this Court. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner would bring to the notice of this Court, of the proceedings issued by the Coimbatore Corporation in Na.Ka.No. 3564/2013/MC1, dated 13.6.2014 wherein the following has been given:

nfhak;g[j;Jhh; khefuhl;rp Mizahsh; mth;fspd; bray;Kiw Miz Miz gpwg;gpg;gth; ? jpUkjp/f/yjh. ,/M/g/. e/f/vz;/3564-2013-vk;rp1 ehs;/ 06/2014 bghUs; ? gzpaikg;g[ ? nfhak;g[j;Jhh; khefuhl;rp ? jpU/v!;/ghyr;re;jh; njh;r;rpj; jpwd; cjtpahsh; epiy? 1 mth;fSf;F brd;id cah;ePjpkd;w jPh;g;gpd; mog;gilapy; gjtp cah;t[fs; tH';fp Mizaplg;gLfpwJ/ ghh;it ? 1/ brd;id cah;ePjpkd;w W.P.No.33584-2013 kw;Wk; M.P.No.1-2013 d; jPh;g;g[ ehs; 18/12/2013/ 2/ muR Jizr; brayhsh;. efuhl;rp eph;thfk; kw;Wk; FoePh; tH';fy; Jiw mth;fspd; fojk; vz;/5956-vk;rp4-2012?9/ ehs; 24/03/2014/ 3/ epakdk; kw;Wk; nky; KiwaPl;Lf;FG jPh;khd vz;/93. ehs; 09/06/2014/

?????????

http://www.judis.nic.in

25

Miz

nfhak;g[j;Jhh; khefuhl;rpapy; njh;r;rpj; jpwd; cjtpahsh; epiy 1 Mfg; gzpg[hpa[k; jpU/v!;/ghyr;re;jh; mth;fSf;F ghh;it 1y; fhQqk; brd;id cah;ePjpkd;w jPh;g;gpd; goa[k;. ghh;it 2y; fhQqk; muRf; fojj;jpd; goa[k;. ghh;it 3y; fhQqk; epakdk; kw;Wk; nky; KiwaPl;Lf;FG jPh;khdj;jpd; goa[k;. fPH;fz;lthW gjtp cah;t[fs; tH';fp Mizaplg;gLfpwJ/

murhiz vz;/140 efuhl;rp eph;thfk; kw;Wk; FoePh; tH';fy; Jiw ehs; 27/05/1997d;go. njh;r;rp jpwd; cjtpahsh; epiy 2 ypUe;J 27/05/1997k; njjp Kjy; njh;r;rp jpwd; cjtpahsh; epiy 1 gzpaplj;jpw;F fUj;jpayhf gjtp cah;t[k;. ,g;gzpaplj;jpy; xU tUlk; gzp Koj;j ehshd 27/05/1998 Kjy; bjhHpy; El;g cjtpahsh; gzpaplj;jpw;F fUj;jpayhf gjtp cah;t[k; tH';fp Mizaplg;gLfpwJ/ nkYk; 01/05/2006 Kjy; ,sk; bghwpahsh; gzpaplj;jpw;F U:/9300?34800+4400 ju Cjpak; vd;w Cjpa tpfpjj;jpy; gjtp cah;t[ tH';fp kj;jpa kz;ly thh;L vz;/68 kw;Wk; 74y; gzpg[hpa Mizaplg;gLfpwJ/

nkw;fz;l gzpahsh; ,sk; bghwpahsuhf gjtp cah;t[ tH';fg;gl;l ,lj;jpy; cldoahf gzpapy; nrh;e;J gzp nrh; mwpf;ifapid Mizahsh; mth;fSf;F mDg;gp itf;FkhW bjhptpf;fg;gLfpwJ/ ,e;j Miz cldoahf mKYf;F tUfpwJ/

xk;-?

Mizahsh;. nfhak;g[j;J}h; khefuhl;rp/

bgWeh;

jpU/v!;/ghyre;jh;. njh;r;rp jpwd; cjtpahsh; epiy 1. kj;jpa kz;lyk;. nfhak;g[j;J}h; khefuhl;rp/

By making all these submissions, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner would submit that, the impugned orders of reversion for all these reasons stated above, have to be interfered with by this Court and the respective writ petitions have to be allowed.

http://www.judis.nic.in

26

Per contra, Mr.P.Srinivas, the learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent in W.P.Nos.18951 to 18953/11 would submit that though the second respondent / Municipal Corporation had initially issued orders, grouping the various posts at the second respondent / Municipal Corporation, pursuant to G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 as well as G.O.Ms.No.140, dated 27.5.1997 by his proceedings dated 01.09.2009, these petitioners had made representations to the second respondent / Municipal Corporation to group them in appropriate places as per the service regulations envisaged in G.O.Ms.No.237, dated 26.9.1996 as clarified by the Government under G.O.Ms.No.140, dated 27.5.1997. Accordingly, revised orders of grouping of post in respect of these petitioners and other similarly placed persons had been issued by the second respondent on 16.09.2009 and 09.10.2009. Accordingly, the petitioner in W.P.No.18951 of 2011 was grouped to the post of Technical Assistant and the petitioners in W.P.No.18953 of 2011 were grouped to the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I. By subsequent proceedings dated 09.10.2009, the petitioners in both W.P.No.18952 and 18953 of 2011 were grouped to the post of Technical Assistant from the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I as well as Skilled Assistant Grade-II.

http://www.judis.nic.in

27

He would further state that these grouping and postings were given to these petitioners on the basis of the clarification issued by the Government in G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 . However, the third respondent in its audit objection and directive dated 14.3.2011 pointed out the flaw on the part of the second respondent Corporation that the groupings and postings given to these petitioners were not in consonance with the mandatory guidelines issued under G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008. The learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent would further submit that since G.O.(Ms).No. 206, dated 22.10.2008 was issued specifically for grouping of posts at the second respondent / Municipal Corporation, where the posts such as Technical Assistant, Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Skilled Assistant Grade-II had been quoted with directives that those postings should be grouped from among the posts held by the personal hitherto, in respect of each of such posts. For better appreciation, the learned standing counsel would invite the attention of this Court to the relevant portion of the said Government Order i.e.,

Sl.No. 5, 6 and 7 of the annexure to G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 which reads thus:

5 bjhHp;yEl;g cjtpahsu;	4 13	jw;nghJs;s 4
4500?125?7000		gzpapl';fs; bjhlu

http://www.judis.nic.in

28

mDkjpf;fg;gLfpwJ/
nkYk; TLjyhf 15
gzpapl';fs;
njhw;Wtpf;fg;gLfpwJ/
(gzp nkw;ghu;itahsu;-
gltiuthsu;
gzpapl';fis
xU';fpizf;fg;gl;L
njhw;Wtpf;fg;gLfpwJ/)
khefuhl;rp gzp
tpjpfspd;go
,g;gzpapl';fs; g{u;jjp ;
bra;ag;glntz;Lk;/
6 bray;jpwd; cjtpahsu; epiy/1 3 10 jw;nghJs;s 3
4000?100?6000 gzpapl';fs; bjhlu
mDkjpf;fg;gLfpwJ/
nkYk; TLjyhf 10
gzpapl';fs;
njhw;Wtpf;fg;gLfpwJ/
(jiyik ePnuw;W epiya
kpd;gzpahsu; epiy/1/
bghUj;Jeu; epiy 1.
FHha; bghUj;Jeu; Mfpa
gzpapl';fs;
xU';fpizf;fg;gl;L
njhw;Wtpf;fg;gLfpwJ/)
khefuhl;rp gzp
tpjpfspd;go
,g;gzpapl';fs; g{u;j;jp
bra;ag;glntz;Lk;/
7 bray;jpwd; cjtpahsu; epiy/2 16 20 jw;nghJs;s 16
3050?75?3950?0?4590 gzpapl';fs; bjhlu
mDkjpf;fg;gLfpwJ/
nkYk; 20 gzpapl';fs;
njhw;Wtpf;fg;gLfpwJ/
(kpd;gzpahsu; epiy/2.

http://www.judis.nic.in

29
bghUj;Jeh; epiy/2.
kPl;lu; uPlu;. FHha;
Ma;tu;. tojs gLif
,af;Fgtu;. kpd;
fk;gpahsu;. gzp Ma;tu;
Mfpa gzpapl';fis
xU';fpizf;fg;gl;L
njhw;Wtpf;fg;gLfpwJ)
khefuhl;rp gzp
tpjpfspd;go
,g;gzpapl';fs; g{u;j;jp
bra;ag;glntz;Lk;/
19. The learned counsel would further state that in view of the
specific directives issued in the aforesaid annexure to
G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008, only certain specific posts alone
have to be regrouped either as a Technical Assistant or as a Skilled
Assistant Grade-I or Skilled Assistant Grade-II. Therefore, only based
on these Government Orders, which were specifically meant for second
respondent / Municipal Corporation, the third respondent had raised
audit objection, and after pointing out the lapses on the part of the
second respondent Corporation in re-grouping the posts and giving
postings to these petitioners, had issued direction in the audit report
itself that these petitioners have to be reverted and to be posted

http://www.judis.nic.in

30

strictly following the prescriptions given in G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008.

Therefore, the learned counsel would state that, the second respondent Corporation, in view of the audit objection and directive issued, and also taking into account, the G.O.Ms.No.206, dated 22.10.2008, which was specifically issued for second respondent corporation, had no other option except to revert these petitioners and accordingly, the violations pointed out by the auditing Team has been rectified by issuance of impugned orders of reversion. Therefore, the learned standing counsel would state that the petitioners cannot make any claim to have the benefit of postings as they sought for in regrouping, sans the guidelines issued under G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 and therefore, the impugned orders are strictly in consonance with the relevant Government Order, namely, G.O.Ms.No.206, dated 22.10.2008 and therefore, these orders require no interference from this Court.

Mr. P.Srinivas, the learned counsel appearing for the third

respondent would also submit, by relying upon the averments made in the counter affidavit made by the third respondent that, though there

http://www.judis.nic.in

31

was no monetary loss to the second respondent / Municipal Corporation as claimed by the petitioners, the wrong grouping and fitment made by the Corporation in respect of these petitioners in violation of the relevant Government Orders, were pointed out by the third respondent. He would further state that whenever there is a violation of the Government Order, it is the duty of the audit team to point out the same and corrective measures have to be suggested / mandated by the audit team and this is what exactly had been done by the third respondent in the impugned audit report and directive dated 14.3.2011 and therefore, the same need not be found fault with by the petitioners for any reason.

I have also heard Mr.A.Zakir Hussain, the Government Advocate, who appears for the first respondent / State, and he would submit that, whatever action done by the third respondent and the consequent corrective action made by the second respondent corporation in the impugned orders, are only in consonance with the relevant Government Orders issued by the department concerned of the State, and therefore, these impugned orders cannot be questioned on the grounds raised by the petitioners in these batch of writ petitions and therefore, the learned Government Advocate would submit that,

http://www.judis.nic.in

32

the orders impugned, are sustainable. Therefore, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed.

I have given my anxious consideration to the facts of the case and also the various arguments advanced by the respective learned counsel appearing for the parties and have perused the materials placed by the parties concerned before this Court for my consideration.

The crux of the issue in all these writ petitions, especially,

writ petitions in W.P.No.18951 to 18953 of 2011, can be summarised as follows:

(i) Whether these petitioners are entitled to get grouping of posting such as Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Technical Assistant because of their long years of service and experience. ?

(ii) Whether these petitioners are entitled to get grouping of postings and fitment in the said postings, namely Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Technical Assistant inspite of the mandatory guidelines issued by the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.206 dated 22.10.2008?

(iii) Whether the clarificatory Government Order issued by the State in G.O.Ms.No.140, Municipal Administration and Water Supply

http://www.judis.nic.in

33

Department, dated 27.5.1997 will give leverage to the second respondent Corporation to give one level jump promotion to these petitioners and if so whether the grouping and promotions given to them earlier which was subsequently, reverted through the impugned orders, were justifiable?

The facts which have been stated, as culled out from the affidavits filed by respective petitioners, are, by and large not in dispute. The further facts that these petitioners had been given grouping of posting and given promotion as such, by orders dated 16.09.2009 and 09.10.2009, are also not in dispute till the audit objection was raised.

The first objection came from the third respondent through

the impugned audit report dated 14.3.2011 is that, G.O.(Ms).No.237 dated 26.9.1996 was issued only for the purpose of taking a decision to grouping the posting and to decide the continuation of the existing posting and to create new posting at Erode corporation, i.e, the second respondent herein. In this regard, the audit objection was that the petitioner in W.P.No.18951 of 2011 was working as Electrician GradeI. The said post according to G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 has

http://www.judis.nic.in

34

to be grouped only as Skilled Assistant Grade-I. However, when grouping was made the said petitioner in W.P.No.18951 of 2011 had been grouped as Technical Assistant by order dated 16.09.2009. Therefore, the said grouping was not in consonance with G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 and in fact, it runs contra to the said Government Order. Therefore, the audit objection was raised and it was directed to the second respondent to revert him to the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I only and to recover the excess salary if any paid. Like that, insofar as the petitioners in W.P.No.18953 of 2011 is concerned, all the three petitioners, before grouping, were working as lineman and these postings had to be grouped as per G.O.Ms.No.206, dated 22.10.2008 only as Skilled Assistant Grade-II. However, since they have been grouped initially as Skilled Assistant Grade-I and subsequently, Technical Assistant was not in consonance with G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 and accordingly, the said objection was raised by the third respondent and recommended for reversion of these petitioners.

In respect of the petitioners in W.P.No.18952 of 2011 is

concerned, since these petitioners also, on the basis of the erstwhile

post held by them, should have been grouped only as Skilled Assistant

http://www.judis.nic.in

35

Grade-II and only thereafter, they can be given further promotion as Skilled Assistant Grade-I and subsequently, Technical Assistant. However, they have been given grouping straight away from Skilled Assistant Grade-II to Technical Assistant and therefore, the said grouping and posting given to these writ petitioners were in violation of G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 and therefore, it was objected by the third respondent / audit team and recommended for reversion.

Whether or not these recommendations made by the third respondent for reversion of these petitioners are valid, in view of the import of G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 and subsequent clarification G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 of Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, is to be examined.

The relevant portion of annexure-I to G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 has already been extracted above, according to which, the technical post in Engineering and Water Supply department of local bodies at Corporations had to be grouped only under three heads, namely, Technical Assistant, Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Skilled Assistant Grade-II.

http://www.judis.nic.in

36

In this regard, clause (iii) of annexure-I of G.O(Ms).No.237 unambiguously mandates that, “the Commissioners of all these Corporations should group all the existing technical posts within the above said three categories only taking into account their present scales of pay and nature of work.

Emphasis supplied

Annexure-II to the G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996

speaks about existing posts to be grouped. According to which, the Electrician Grade-I post can be grouped as Technical Assistant. Electrician, Fitter etc., have to be grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-I and those, who are working in the scale of pay of Rs.975-1500 can be grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-II. Therefore, the main object of grouping as envisaged in G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 was that,

the technical posts have to be grouped under three broad categories mainly on the basis of scale of pay. Those, who got the scale of pay of Rs.1350-2200 can be grouped as Technical Assistant, Rs.1100-1660

can be grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-1 and those who were in existing pay of Rs.975-1500 can be grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-II.

http://www.judis.nic.in

37

In this regard, the fact remains that all these petitioners were drawing higher pay than the basic pay limit of Rs.975 – 1500/-.

That apart, when the respective corporations were engaging re-grouping the post, according to the service rules prescribed under G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996, as referred to above, they experienced so many difficulties and therefore, it seems that, the respective corporations such as Tirunelveli Corporation, Tiruchirappalli Corporation and Salem Corporation sought for clarifications from the Government on various issues. Accordingly, the Government issued G.O.(Ms).No.140, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department dated 27.5.1997, wherein, each and every query raised by the respective corporations, have been clarified by the Government, and those queries as well as clarifications have been consolidated under the heading “Appendix-Clarification”. In the said AppendixClarification, Sl.No.7 is relevant for the purpose of the issue raised in these writ petitions. Therefore, the said clarification in respect of query No.7 given by the Government in G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 is extracted here under:

“The Tap Inspectors Work Since most of the technical staff Inspectors, Line Inspectors, in the Corporations are in the

http://www.judis.nic.in

38

Motor Rader, Motor Mechanic etc of the Engineering and Water Supply Sub-Ordinate Service of the Corporations have represented as follows:

(1) They are in a scale of pay of Rs.950-1500. Under the new Service Rules, they can be grouped in the post of skilled Assistant Grade-II only.

(2) They will be considered for promotion to the post of skilled Assistant Grade I i.e in the scale of pay of Rs.1100-1600.

(3) Most of them have completed 20 years of service and are in the special Renders grade scale of pay i.e Rs.1350-2200.

(4) Most of them are Diploma holders and some of them are studying diploma courses.

(5) Since the post of Tap Inspectors, work Inspectors, Line Inspectors are supervisor, posts and since they are controlling field workers, all of them irrespective of their service may be grouped in the post of Technical Assistant.

scale of pay of Rs.950-1500, they can be grouped in the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-II only, therefore, there will be only a few persons in Skilled Assistant Grade I and in Technical Assist posts. If direct recruitments are made for these two posts, then those who have completed 20 years of service in skilled Assistant Grade II and are waiting for promotions in these corporations will have to work under these newly recruited persons. If all of them are grouped in the Technical Assistant Posts, it will be considered as one level jump promotion to them. Therefore,

(1) The Tap Inspectors, work Inspectors, Line Inspectors, Motor Motor Mechanics who have completed 20 years of service on the date of issue of this order may be promoted as skilled Assistant Grade I , i.e. in the scale of pay of Rs.11001660. After completion of a minimum of one year service in the post of Skilled Assistant Grade I, they may be promoted as Technical Assistants in the scale of pay of Rs.1350-2200. The qualification that a pass in Diploma for the post of Technical Assistant need not be insisted on them. (2) The Tap Inspectors, work

http://www.judis.nic.in

39

Inspectors and Electrical Line Inspectors who are now in the supervisory posts and who have put in less than 20 years of service may also be promoted as Skilled Assistant Grade-I. After completion of a minimum of one year service in the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I they may also be promoted as Technical Assistants subject to the condition that they should qualify themselves within the period prescribed in the new corporation Service Rules. (3) The direct recruitment to the post of Technical Assistants and Skilled Assistants Grade I need not be made in the corporation till all the above said incumbents are promoted as Technical Assistants”

If we look at these clarification as extracted above, one can

easily find that in order to give credence to the long service rendered by various technical persons working in Municipal Corporation, it was directed by the Government, through the said clarifications that, no direct recruitment be made to the post of Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Technical Assistant post. The said clarification was issued on the sound reasoning that if direct recruitment are made to these posts, those

http://www.judis.nic.in

40

who had been working in the post of Skilled Assistant Gr-II for 20 years and more would be compelled to work under these new entrants. Therefore, inorder to avoid that placing the seniors under the newly recruited juniors that too in technical posts, it was clarified by the Government that all those persons, depending upon the number of years of experience, i.e., those who have completed 20 years of Skilled Assistant Grade-II can be considered for one level jump

promotion.

The further clarification given as extracted above by the Government is that, those who have completed 20 years of service on the date of issue of G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 may be promoted as Skilled Assistant Grade-I i.e., in the scale of pay of Rs.1100-1660/-. Thereafter, on completion of one year service as Skilled Assistant Grade-I, they may be promoted as Technical Assistants in the scale of pay of Rs.1350-2200/-. It is further clarified that qualification that a pass in diploma, for the post of Technical Assistant, need not be insisted on them.

The direct recruitment to the post of Technical Assistants and Skilled Assistants Grade-I need not be made in the Corporations till the

http://www.judis.nic.in

41

afore-referred incumbents are given promotions as Technical Assistants.

Such a clarification was given by the Government as to how the service rule provided under G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 has to be implemented in respect of those technical persons, who have been working for long years in the respective Corporations.

It seems that, the second respondent / Corporation had given a consolidated grouping of posting orders vide its proceedings in Na.Ka.No.C1/18577/08 dated 01.09.2009. If we look at the said proceedings dated 01.09.2009, we find that the petitioners herein have been placed at Sl.No.4 and 9 to 13. The petitioner in W.P.No.18951 is placed at Sl.No.4 and he has been grouped to Skilled Assistant Grade-I. Like that, other 5 petitioners, who are the petitioners in W.P.No.18952 and 18953 of 2011, have been grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-II.

Probably this consolidated grouping orders issued by the second respondent Corporation on 01.09.2009 was because of the reason that, in the meanwhile, the State Government issued

http://www.judis.nic.in

42

G.O.(Ms).No.206, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 22.10.2008 especially for second respondent corporation, where, at annexure to the Government Order, in Sl.No. 5 to 7, the post from which grouping can be done to these three posts, namely, Technical Assistant, Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Skilled Assistant Grade-II, had been given.

However, in view of G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 as clarified by G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 as referred to above, it seems that, these petitioners made request to the second respondent corporation that they should be given proper grouping, taking into account their long years of service at the second respondent corporation and also taking into account the clarification issued by the Government, through G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997.

Accordingly, the orders were passed by the second respondent on 16.09.2009 and thereafter, on 09.10.2009 whereby all these petitioners have been grouped as Technical Assistants. Those groupings and postings as Technical Assistants, had been given to these petitioners, based on the clarification given to point No.7 of G.O.Ms.No.140, dated 27.5.1997, which has already been extracted

http://www.judis.nic.in

43

herein above.

In this regard, the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent / Municipality at paragraph 9, which has already been extracted above, has to be looked into.

According to the second respondent, the grouping and redesignation given to the petitioner in W.P.No. 18951 of 2011 from the post of Electrician Grade-I to Technical Assistant was in order and it requires no interference. Therefore, even according to the second respondent corporation, the grouping and re-designation given to the petitioner in W.P.No.18951 of 2011, namely, N. Natrayansamy, is concerned, it was, according to the second respondent, made in accordance with the relevant Government Orders and therefore, it requires no interference.

However in respect of other petitioners are concerned, the stand of the second respondent is that, though initially they had been grouped and re-designated as Skilled Assistant Grade-I and thereafter, Technical Assistant, subsequently, because of the objection raised and directive issued by the third respondent, orders were issued rectifying

http://www.judis.nic.in

44

the wrong re-designation and grouping, through the impugned orders.

No doubt, G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 was issued only in respect of the second respondent corporation, where the grouping and re-designation in respect of these three posts have been given at Sl.Nos of 5, 6 and 7 of the annexure to the said Government Order. However, in the said G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008, it is referred to about G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 whereby the Service rule to govern these employees working at Municipal Corporations, except Chennai Corporation, had been issued.

When implementation was taking place in grouping and redesignation of various posts, some Municipal Corporations, since experienced difficulties, sought for clarification from the Government. Government also for each and every query raised by the respective corporations, had given answers in the clarifications issued, as annexure to G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997.

At paragraph 3 of the said Government Order, the

Government has stated as follows:

“ 3. The Government after careful examination of the representations of the

http://www.judis.nic.in

45

service Associations and a few individuals, issue the clarifications appended to this order. The commissioners of all corporations except Chennai are requested to implement the clarifications with immediate effect.”

Therefore, whatever the clarifications given in the said G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 were directed to be implemented

with immediate effect by the respective corporations.

As we have already extracted and discussed above,

clarification is given by the Government for query No.7 in the said G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 in detail. Based on the said clarification, if at all any grouping and re-designation has to be given for those who are working in various capacities, it must be grouped as Skilled Assistant Grade-II, Skilled Assistant Grade-I and Technical Assistant. The mandatory clarification, as has been provided under G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, has to be necessarily followed by

the respective corporations. When G.O.Ms.No.237, dated 26.9.1996 is the statutory rule governing the service conditions, especially, with regard to the grouping, re-designation, retaining of posts and creation of new posts the G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 which was subsequently issued by the Government, only in respect of second

http://www.judis.nic.in

46

respondent / Municipal Corporation, cannot have an over-riding effect of either G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 or the clarification issued under G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997.

Whatever guidelines given under G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008 with regard to grouping, re-designation and creation of posts are concerned, those guidelines, ofcourse, shall be followed by the second respondent Corporation, but the same should not run contra to either G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 or the clarificatory G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997.

In this regard, this Court is of the considered view that, G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 is the basic service rule which has been clarified as to how, it has to be implemented, by G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 and therefore, without destroying

the import of the said rule, as well as the clarification, the second respondent corporation should act upon, as per the guidelines provided under G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008.

Therefore, though initially a combined grouping and redesignation list of technical persons was issued by the second

http://www.judis.nic.in

47

respondent on 01.09.2009, subsequently, the same was rectified of course, at the instance of the petitioners herein, by the second respondent, through the orders dated 16.9.2009 as well as 09.10.2009.

It is also to be noted that, there is no financial implications because of re-grouping or re-designation of posts, where these petitioners are fit in. The reason being that, these petitioners have already reached the higher scale of pay because of their long years of service at the second respondent corporation. These factors have been admitted both by the second respondent as well as the third respondent. Moreover, the second respondent in its counter at paragraph 9, as extracted above, has specifically mentioned that the regrouping and re-designation to the post of Technical Assistant given to the petitioner in W.P.No.18951 of 2011 was perfectly in order and it requires no interference.

Insofar as the other petitioners are concerned, though it was claimed by the second respondent that the impugned orders had been issued inorder to rectify the mistakes committed by them, of course pursuant to the objections raised by the third respondent, and

http://www.judis.nic.in

48

directives issued by them, through the audit report and objection dated 14.3.2011, the said exercise of alleged rectification, as claimed by the second respondent, culminated in the impugned orders of reversion, should not have been undertaken without issuing any notice to these petitioners, because they would be affected persons. When this Court, specifically, pointed out this defect, the learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent corporation would fairly submit that no notice was issued before the issuance of impugned reversion orders.

Had notice been issued to the petitioners, certainly, the petitioners would have been in a position to put forth their case before the second respondent corporation, by citing all these reasons that the rule envisaged under G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 as clarified under G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997 since have provided for regrouping and re-designation of these petitioners to the post of Technical Assistant because of the clarification to query No.7 at annexure to G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, and the second respondent corporation would have been in a position to confirm their earlier action taken in this regard by issuance of order of redesignation dated 16.09.2009 and 09.10.2009. Moreover, pursuant to

http://www.judis.nic.in

49

G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 and clarification issued under G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, which are general in nature, would apply to all Municipal Corporations of the State, except Chennai, this kind of difficulties arose in various Corporations and that is the reason why, the clarification had already been sought for and was given by the Government under G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997. When similar issue experienced by Coimbatore Corporation came up for consideration, this Court by, atleast in two writ petitions in W.P.No.33584 of 2013 and W.P.No.33585 of 2013, dated 18.12.2013, after adverting to various Government Orders including G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 and G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, has given directions to the said Municipal Corporation to consider the request of the respective petitioners for giving regrouping, re-designation / posting, promotion.

Pursuant to the said directive, the Coimbatore Corporation has acted upon and issued orders which has also been extracted

herein above.

Moreover, the second respondent corporation, during the pendency of these writ petitions, has issued further proceedings on

http://www.judis.nic.in

50

26.8.2016. This was necessitated because some of the third grade Municipalities located adjacent to the Corporation limit of second respondent since had been annexed with the second respondent corporation, those working in that Municipalities also had been brought under the common category of the second respondent corporation. Accordingly, the second respondent issued this proceedings whereby seniority list to the post of Technical Assistant for the year 2016-17 had been issued. According to the said proceedings, the petitioner in W.P.No.18952 of 2011 stood as No.1 in the seniority list of Technical Assistant, the other petitioners in other two writ petitions are stood from Sl.No.7 to 11. The said seniority list was issued tentatively of course, subject to the outcome of the decision of this Court in these batch of writ petitions.

Having regard to all these factual matrices and rule position, especially, G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 which is the service rule governing the employees of Municipal Corporations including the second respondent, as clarified by G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, it is no difficult to hold that regrouping and re-designation of post such as Technical Assistant, Skilled Assistant Grade-I, insofar as these petitioners are concerned, if it is in consonance with Rules under

http://www.judis.nic.in

51

G.O.(Ms).No.237, dated 26.9.1996 as clarified at point No.7 to annexure to G.O.(Ms).No.140, dated 27.5.1997, certainly those regrouping and redesignation are valid and it does not violate the guidelines issued by the Government under G.O.(Ms).No.206, dated 22.10.2008.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the

discussions made, these batch of writ petitions are disposed with the following orders:

(i) The respective impugned orders i.e, audit report /objection of the third respondent, dated 14.3.2011 in so far as the petitioners are concerned and the order of reversion of the second respondent dated 23.5.2011 and 26.5.2011, are quashed.

(ii) The second respondent corporation is directed to re-look the issue by applying the clarification issued by the Government to query

No.7 at Appendix-Clarification to G.O.(Ms).No.140, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 27.5.1997, and if ultimately, found that all these petitioners are satisfying the clarifications issued therein, they shall be given grouping / re-

http://www.judis.nic.in

52

designation, posting, promotion in their respective category, namely, either Skilled Assistant Gr-I or Technical Assistant as the case may be.

(iii) After completing the exercise as directed at (ii) (above) the second respondent corporation shall proceed to consider the request of the petitioners for promotion to the next higher post, namely, Junior Engineer as claimed by them in W.P.No.25066 of 2011 and pass necessary orders there on, depending upon the eligibility of the respective petitioner.

(iv) It is made clear that, whatever be the outcome of decision of the second respondent for regrouping / re-designation, posting, promotion, that shall take effect from the date, actually, the respective petitioner become due to get such re-designation / posting / promotion

and accordingly, their service benefits, including monetary benefits, shall be calculated and be provided to them.

The aforesaid directions shall be complied with by the second respondent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

http://www.judis.nic.in

53

Accordingly, these writ petitions are allowed to the terms as

indicated above. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Index:Yes 03.11.2017
Internet : Yes
kua
Note: Issue on 06.11.2017
To
1. The Principal Secretary
Government of Tamilnadu
Municipal Administration and
Water Supply Department.
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Commissioner,
Erode City Municipal Corporation,
Erode – 638 001.
3. The Assistant Director of Local Fund Audit,
O/o, Erode City Municipal Corporation,
Erode – 638 001.

http://www.judis.nic.in

54

R.SURESH KUMAR,J.

kua

W.P.Nos.18951, 18952,
18953 & 25066 of 2011
03.11.2017

http://www.judis.nic.in