K.K. Sasidharan, J. - (1.) THESE Writ Petitions relate to the absorbtion of Engineers of Highways Department and Agricultural Engineering Department in the Rural Development Department of theGovernment of Tamil Nadu and the question involved is as to whether deputationists who continue to have their lien in their parent department are entitled for absorption in the Borrowing Department in the absence of a provision in the statutory rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) SINCE the issue involved in all these Writ Petitions are similar in nature and as the challenge was very much in relation to the Government order in G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 25.01.2000, the Writ Petitions were taken together and are being disposed of by this common Judgment. In order to appreciate the relief sought for by the respective petitioners, the prayer in each of the Writ Petitions are reproduced herein. (i) W.P.No,26228 of 2005:- The relief sought for is to quash the ad hoc Rules issued by theGovernment of Tamil Nadu in G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 25.01.2000 insofar as it failed to make provision to absorb the petitioner and similarly placed Engineers of Highways Department and to direct the Government to absorb the petitioner in Rural Development Department as Assistant Executive Engineer. (ii) W.P.No,24453 of 2004:- This Writ Petition is for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 in the said Writ Petition to absorb the service of the Writ Petitioners as Assistant Executive Engineers in the original post earmarked for the personnel from Highways Department in Rural Development Department. (iii) W.P.Nos.37206 to 37208 of 2004:- The petitioners have challenged the order dated 10.12.2002, terminating their deputation. (iv) W.P.No,28434 of 2004:- Writ Petition No,28434/2004 was preferred against the order dated 27.04.2004 in O.A.No.1791/2004 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, whereby the Tribunal directed the Government to consider the claim of the applicants in the said Original Application for being promoted to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in Rural Development Engineering Wing. (v) W.P.No,31619 of 2004:- In W.P.No,31619/2004, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16.03.2004 in O.A.Nos.1068 to 1081/2004 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal whereby, the Tribunal directed consideration of the applicants in the said original applications for promotion on regular basis in terms of Rule 39 of the General Rules and to go ahead with the selection process by preparing the panel. (vi) W.P.No,23942 of 2004:- In W.P.No,23942/2004, the challenge is to the order dated 12.08.2004, whereby, the Writ Petitioner was repatriated to the Highways Department. (vii)W.P.No,3162 of 2005:- W.P.No,3162/2005 was filed by the very same petitioner in W.P.No,23942/2004, and the challenge is to the order dated 17.11.2005 in G.O.(D) No,572, to quash the same and to promote him to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in the Rural Development Department with effect from the date of promotion given to his juniors. (viii) W.P.No,23072 of 2004:- In W.P.No,23072/2004 filed by the Engineers of the Agricultural Engineering Department, their prayer was to issue a Writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from applying the qualification of Degree in Civil Engineering for the post of Assistant Engineer in Rural Development Department as per recruitment Rule in G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 25.01.2000 and consequently, to absorb the Engineers holding B.E. Degree in Agricultural Department as Assistant Engineers in Rural Development Department. (ix) W.P.No,29715 of 2004:- In W.P.No,29715/2004, the prayer is to issue a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents to draw up a panel of persons holding the post of Assistant Engineers in Rural Development Department by including the petitioner, and fix the seniority in the post of Assistant Engineers after counting the service rendered by the petitioners in Agricultural Engineering Department and Rural Development Department, as per G.O.Ms.No.102 dated 25.05.1998. There were two other Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.24672/2004 and 24710/2004 preferred for identical reliefs and those Writ Petitions were dismissed as withdrawn on 14.03.2007 and 21.03.2007 respectively, as found from the records.
(3.) THE background facts in all these Writ Petitions are more or less similar and the ultimate relief claimed is to absorb them in the Rural Development Department. THErefore, we are of the view that the facts as found in W.P.Nos.28434/2004 and 31619/2004 would project the contentions raised in all these Writ Petitions. THE facts of the case as found in W.P.No,23942/2004 and W.P.No,3162/2005 would be dealt with separately. W.P.Nos.28434 and 23072 of 2004:- Petitioner's contention:- This Writ Petition is directed against the order dated 27.04.2004 in O.A.No.1791/2004 on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. The application in O.A.No.1791/2004 was preferred by the second Respondent to direct the third Respondent to promote him as Assistant Executive Engineer in the existing or future vacancy in the Rural Development Department as per the statutory Rules framed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.15 dated 21.05.2000. The Writ Petitioner was not a party to the said application. The Original Application No.1791/2004 was taken up along with O.A.Nos.1792 to 1801/2004 and all the applications were disposed of by a common order by the Tribunal on 27.04.2004.;