6.It seems that, for last some hearings, no one was appeared for the petitioner and today also, when the case is called, no one is appearing for the petitioner. However, Ms.DR.Djearany, learned Government Advocate (Puducherry) appearing for respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.V.Govardhan, learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent were present. Both the learned counsel submitted that, based on the request made by various Service Associations, in order to resolve the issue, the Government, having considered all these aspects, had constituted a Three Member Committee and based on the recommendation given by the Committee, G.O.Ms.No.25/LAS/2007 date 15.06.2007 was issued, where the post called Junior Assistant and Senior Assistant working in Local Administration i.e., Commune like the third respondent has been redesignated as LDC and UDC respectively and the said redesignation has been uniformly made in respect of all such Senior Assistants and Junior Assistants and the redesignated post is called Upper Division Clerk as well as the Lower Division Clerk. Therefore, as against which, assuming that the petitioner has got any grievance over such redesignation, he has to challenge the G.O.Ms.No.25/LAS/2007 dated 15.06.2007. Without challenging the same, the present challenge made against the impugned order cannot stand under the legal scrutiny. Therefore, on that sole ground itself, the writ petition has to be dismissed, they contended.
