S PREMA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS seek to set aside the letter of the second respondent dated 24. 10. 1997 in this writ petition.

(2.) THE brief facts necessary for disposal of the writ petition as stated in the affidavit are that the petitioners are working as Typists and they have acquired the qualification for further promotion to the post of Assistant. When the question of promotion to the post of Assistant came up for consideration among the Junior Assistants and Typists, the Government passed orders fixing the ratio of 4:1 in G. O. Ms. No. 224 Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 8. 3. 1984, that is 4 posts for Junior Assistants and one post for the Typists. As objections were raised by the Typists for the said ratio, the Government stayed implementation of the said ratio. Some of the Typists filed writ petition before this Court and challenged the ratio, which was subsequently transferred to the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in T. A. No. 1449 of 1989. The said application was heard along with some other original applications filed subsequently, and the Tribunal by order dated 27. 11. 1992 set aside the G. O. 224 dated 8. 3. 1984, holding that the said ratio will affect the seniority already fixed by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission while filling up the vacancies. Thereafter, the Government issued GO (D)No. 504 Municipal administration and Water Supply Department dated 11. 9. 1995. However, the Government by the impugned letter dated 24. 10. 1997, stated that 4:1 ratio will be followed for the vacancies arose prior to 27. 11. 1992 and for the vacancies that arose after 27. 11. 1992, interse seniority may be fixed between the Junior Assistants and Typists. The said letter of the Government dated 24. 10. 1997 is challenged in this writ petition as violative to Article 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and without any reasonable basis.

(3.) THE learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that by virtue of the impugned Government Letter the respondents are trying to nullify the order of the Tamil Nadu administrative Tribunal dated 27. 11. 1992 and are trying to implement 4:1 ratio, which is held unreasonable, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The learned counsel further added that nowhere in the said order of the Tribunal it is held that the order can be applied prospectively. On the contrary, the order of the Tribunal set aside the government action in fixing 4:1 ratio in its entirety. Therefore, according to the learned Senior counsel, there is no justification on the part of the Government to state that the vacancies arose prior to 27. 11. 1992 will be filled up as per 4:1 ratio and the vacancies that arose after 27. 11. 1992 will be filed up on the basis of interse seniority of Junior Assistants and Typists.