V.Sivakumar Vs the Secretary to Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

V.Sivakumar Vs the Secretary to Government — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners were entitled to be included in the panels for the years 2010-2011 and 2013-2014 and promoted as Assistant Executive Engineers retrospectively, under the fifth-vacancy (every 20th vacancy) quota earmarked for Junior Engineers promoted from the Draughtsman/Overseer category. +1 more

Court's answer

The petitioners were rightly deferred from inclusion in the panels for the years 2010-2011 and 2013-2014 for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer.

Ratio / Principle

Although the post of Overseer continued to exist, i.e., 5 years after the Government order dated 22.12.1986, the provision of quota for Junior Engineers promoted from the post of Overseers/Draughtsman for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer ceased to exist in view of the amendments issued in GO.Ms.No.3037 Public Works Department dated 22.12.1986.

Key takeaways

The Court found no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order; the writ petition is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.ratio¶52
Recording the scheme: out of five vacancies for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer, the first four are to be filled by recruitment by transfer from among Junior Engineers and the fifth by transfer from Head Draughtsmen and Draughtsmen Grade-I; in the case of Draughtsmen/Overseers of the Tamilnadu Engineering Subordinate Service promoted as Junior Engineers, selection is to be made irrespective of their seniority in the category of Junior Engineers. (Recital of the rule scheme in the course of reasoning, not itself the dispositive decision.)obiter¶47

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Madras (G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J.), W.P.No.31997 of 2023, pronounced 04.12.2025: Two Diploma holders appointed as Irrigation Inspectors and successively promoted as Overseer, Junior Engineer and redesignated Assistant Engineer sought a writ of certiorarified mandamus under Article 226 to quash the first respondent's proceedings (letters Nos.5594/A2/2014-8 and 5594/A2/2014-10 dated 22.01.2015) and direct retrospective promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer in the panels for 2010-2011 and 2013-2014 under Rule 5 a(ii) of the Special Rules of the Tamilnadu Engineering Service, i.e., the fifth-vacancy (every 20th vacancy) quota earmarked for Junior Engineers promoted from the Draughtsman/Overseer category. Procedural backdrop: their promotions/regularisations were subject to O.A.No.1552 of 2003 (renumbered W.P.No.17351 of 2007) filed by the Association of Engineers against the 3:1 ratio; their regularisation, cancelled on 13.12.2010, was restored via W.P.No.2158 of 2011 (order dated 08.10.2013); the OA was dismissed on 27.08.2013; a further panel for 2013-2014 omitted their names; W.P.No.5946 of 2014 (allowed 08.08.2014) directed their inclusion in the current panel with liberty to claim promotion from an anterior date, but that anterior-date claim was rejected by the impugned letter dated 22.01.2015 on the reason that the category of Draughtsman alone is eligible to be promoted. Held: although the post of Overseer continued to exist for 5 years after the Government order dated 22.12.1986, the quota for Junior Engineers promoted from Overseers/Draughtsmen for promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer ceased to exist in view of the amendments in GO.Ms.No.3037 Public Works Department dated 22.12.1986; the petitioners were rightly deferred from the panels of 2010-2011 and 2013-2014; no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. Writ petition dismissed; no order as to costs.

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Impugned letter dated 22.01.2015 of the first respondent (proceedings letter Nos.5594/A2/2014-8 and 5594/A2/2014-10 dated 22.01.2015) rejecting the petitioners' request for promotion as Assistant Executive Engineer from an anterior date in the panels for 2010-2011 and 2013-2014, on the reason that the category of Draughtsman alone is eligible to be promoted.¶34
First respondent - Secretary to Government, Water Resources Department · 22.01.2015
Prior proceeding
The petitioners' promotions and regularisations were made subject to the outcome of O.A.No.1552 of 2003.¶26
Prior proceeding
O.A.No.1552 of 2003 filed by the Association of Engineers challenging Government proceedings dated 31.03.2003 and 09.04.2003 on the 3:1 ratio prescribed for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer; transferred to this Court and renumbered W.P.No.17351 of 2007.¶29
Prior proceeding
Names of the petitioners deferred while drawing the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer for the year 2010-2011.¶29
Prior proceeding
Second respondent cancelled the petitioners' regularisation by order dated 13.12.2010 on account of the pending Association case.¶29
Prior proceeding
Cancellation challenged in W.P.No.2158 of 2011; allowed by order dated 08.10.2013 directing restoration of the regularisation order.¶29
Prior proceeding
O.A.No.1552 of 2003 dismissed by order dated 27.08.2013; even thereafter the petitioners' request to be added to the 2010-2011 panel was not considered.¶29
Prior proceeding
Another panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer issued for the year 2013-2014 without the petitioners' names.¶29
Prior proceeding
W.P.No.5946 of 2014 filed challenging non-inclusion in the panel; allowed by order dated 08.08.2014 directing inclusion of their names in the current panel with liberty to claim promotion from an anterior date.¶34
Prior proceeding
Per the respondents' counter, the panel for the post of Assistant Executive Engineer for the year 2010-2011 was approved on temporary basis by the first respondent.¶40
Prior proceeding
Per the respondents' counter, by communication dated 23.03.2013 the petitioners were informed they would be considered for promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer when their turn reached.¶42
Prior proceeding
Per the respondents' counter, the petitioners were regularised in the post of Junior Engineer only on 30.01.2014 and were therefore contended to be ineligible for the 2010-2011 and 2013-2014 panels as on the crucial dates 01.04.2010 and 01.04.2013.¶42