K KANNIAPPAN Vs. CHAIRMAN TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has entered into service of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board as a Typist, which is a provisional Ministerial Cadre, on 14.10.1958. Out of the three wings of the Ministerial Service of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, namely the Systems Circle Wing, Headquarters Wing and Accounts Wing, it is seen that the Systems Circle Wing and the Accounts Wing came to be merged as Administrative Wing System in the year 1969 by leaving Headquarters Wing to continue to be in effect. It appears that the persons, who continued in the Headquarters Wing had an enormous opportunity of further promotion while such promotional avenue for the persons who have been posted in the Administrative Wing was minimum.

(2.) IT was in those circumstances, as a matter of policy, the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board has evolved a scheme so as to give an opportunity to the employees working in the Administrative Wing to exercise their option to go back to the Headquarters wing. Accordingly, as per the Scheme framed by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, as it is seen in the memorandum issued by the Secretary to the Department dated 12.8.1994, the Administrative Officers in the present Circle, who originally belonged to Headquarters Administration by virtue of their permanent absorption after merger were permitted to give option if they so desire to come back to the Headquarters cadre with their original lien by giving a cut off date by 15.9.1994 stating that if, by the said cut off date, option is not exercised, it is deemed that they opted to remain in the Administration Cadre itself. The relevant portion of the said Scheme is usefully extracted as follows:

(3.) THE claim of the petitioner is to refix the pay on all three cadres, namely as Junior Assistant, as Assistant and as an Assistant Administrative Officer on the basis of the above said comparison. THE impugned order has simply rejected the claim on all counts on the basis that had the petitioner continued in the Headquarters Wing, in normal course, he would have got promotion to the post of Assistant only on 1.11.1969. Similar reason has been given for rejecting the claim of the petitioner in other categories as Assistant Administrative Officer also. From the reference to the seniority list in the Establishment Wing maintained by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, it is clear that atleast in respect of one candidate, namely Mr.S.Karunanidhi, he was appointed on 1.6.1959, while the petitioner was appointed originally on 14.10.1958 as a Typist. Likewise, while the said Karunanidhi was subsequently promoted in the next category on 1.4.1963, the petitioner's promotion was in the year 1961 itself. Inspite of the petitioner's seniority, it is not known as to how the petitioner has been placed below the said candidates and that anomaly has not been rectified and it came to be perpetuated after the option was exercised by the petitioner as per the Scheme formulated by the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.