Assistant Engineer excluded from promotion panel to Assistant Executive Engineer due to a stoppage-of-increment punishment. The court held the punishment took effect from communication (25.02.2001), so its six-month currency ran past the crucial date of 05.08.2001. Exclusion upheld; writ petition dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.08.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
and
M.P.No.1 of 2011
R.Balraj ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent in Memo No.028925/105/G.11/ 2003-5 dated 07.07.2010, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to include the petitioner's name in the appropriate place in the panel for Assistant Engineers (electric) for the promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineers (Electrical) as per the Memo No.003714/8/G1/G11/2002-24 dated 15.06.2002.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Srinivas
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
For Respondents : Mr.Nikkilesh Yadhav for Mr.K.Rajkumar Standing Counsel
ORDER The Memo No.028925/105/G.11/ 2003-5 dated 07.07.2010,
issued by the 1st respondent is under challenge.
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
lapse in the year 1994, his next increment was postponed for a period of six months from 1.10.2001 to 27.4.2002 (including medical leave applied by the petitioner) without cumulative effect. It is the further case of the petitioner that at the time of issuance of panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, he was not undergoing any punishment and no charge was pending on the crucial date namely 05.08.2001 to be inflicted upon him for non inclusion of his name in the panel of Assistant Engineer to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer. The impugned order was passed without following regulations 98 and 106(c).
''In the light of the above both the writ petitions are ordered, setting aside the orders of the appellate authority and remitting the matter back to the appellate
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
authority for a fresh consideration, on the limited question as to how the persons whose names are mentioned by the petitioners came in for more favourable treatment, in the absence of any material to show that they deserved such treatment. The appellate authority shall examine the same taking into account the fact that the petitioners have now been promoted and what is to be examined would now really be confined only to a question or adjustment or seniority and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.''
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
punishment of stoppage of increment for six months have been over by August 2001. Even if the currency of penalty is taken to have commenced in October 2001, it was over by April 2002 and the panel was released on 15.06.2002. Aggrieved by the release of panel as his name was excluded in the promotion panel for the year 2001 to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, he has filed this writ petition.
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
included in the panel.
12.08.2024
Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation Case : Yes / No Speaking Order / Non-Speaking Order ssn
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
To
R.KALAIMATHI, J.,
ssn
W.P.No.23253 of 2011
W.P.No.23253 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011
12.08.2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's exclusion from the promotion panel to Assistant Executive Engineer, on the ground that he was under currency of punishment on the crucial date, was valid.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
R.Balraj
The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
The Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
R.Kalaimathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
