IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.09.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN W.P.Nos.27976 and 27977 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2014 and W.M.P.Nos.4054, 4055 and 5957 of 2016 C.Chandrasekar .. Petitioner in Both the W.Ps Vs.
1. Union of India, Ministry of Shipping rep. By the Secretary to Government, Transport Bhavan, No.1, Parliamentary Street, New Delhi – 1.
2. The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust, No.1, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 1.
3. The Deputy Chairman cum Chairman of the Departmental Promotion Committee, Chennai Port Trust, No.1, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 1.
4. The Chief Engineer, Civil Engineering Department, Chennai Port Trust, No.1, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 1.
5. A.Aruljothi Natarajan 6.S.Radha 7.C.Prabhakaran 8.S.Ramesh Kumar 9.P.Mahadevan 10.K.Nandakumar 11.G.Gnanasekaran 12.M.Gunasekaran 13.R.Nagarajan 14.N.Rajkumar 15.K.Sachidananda Babu 16.M.Nagalingom Pillai 17.D.Muthu 18.R.Haribhaskar 19.D.Muthazahagan 20.S.Murugarasu 21.B.Saravana Perumal 22.N.Ganesaperumal 23.K.Dhansekaran 24.K.Thanasekar 25.S.P.Kirubanidhi 26.G.M.Sathish Kumar 27.S.Rajaram 28.K.Sekar 29.S.Thanigavel 30.M.Subramanian 31.N.Ramesh 32.K.Ganesh 33.K.Jaisankar 34.K.Mohammed Alimullah 35.S.Anbharrason 36.R.Vinoth Kumar 37.R.Pulendran 38.S.Jeyanthi 39.M.Ramar 40.E.Saravanan 41.S.Maharajan 42.P.Thiyagarajan 43.A.H.Sivakumar 44.S.Srinivasan 45.S.Jayaprakash 46.M.Thirunavukkarasu 47.S.Rajamani 48.M.Velmurugan 49.V.Manohar 50.S.Gnanamoorthy 51.C.K.Vaidyanathan 52.A.Bothuraja 53.N.Vijayaraghavan 54.P.Sekar .. Respondents in Both the W.Ps (Respondents 5 to 54 impleaded as per orders dated 03.02.2016 and 25.07.2016 in M.P.No.1 of 2015 in W.P.No.27976 of 2014 and W.M.P.No.9405 of 2016 in W.P.No.27977 of 2014) W.P.No.27976 of 2014: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the promotion panel made for the posts of Assistant Engineer (Civil) Class II from the feeder category of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I and notified by the fourth respondent in his proceedings No.E1/2672/2014/E dated 11.09.2014 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to draw such promotional panel and give effect thereof, only after drawing combined/inter se seniority among the integrated personnel in the feeder category of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I of the erstwhile Dock Labour Board and the Chennai Port Trust.
W.P.No.27977 of 2014: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from underoperating the vacant posts of Assistant Engineers (Civil) Class II as Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I, earmarked for departmental promotion, till the petitioner is promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers (Civil) Class II which has been earmarked for departmental promotion and consequently, direct the respondents to give such promotion to the petitioner by putting him in the appropriate place of the inter se/combined seniority list as may be prepared on a direction of this Court by reckoning the petitioner's original seniority in the feeder category of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I.
For Petitioner .. Mr.S.Rajendiran in both the W.Ps For Respondents .. Mr.V.Balasubramanian, S.P.C. for R1 Mr.M.Palanimuthu for R2 to R4 Mr.T.S.Rajamohan for R5 to R54 in both the W.Ps COMMON ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:
to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the promotion panel made for the posts of Assistant Engineer (Civil) Class II from the feeder category of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I and notified by the fourth respondent in his proceedings No.E1/2672/2014/E dated 11.09.2014 quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to draw such promotional panel and give effect thereof, only after drawing combined/inter se seniority among the integrated personnel in the feeder category of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I of the erstwhile Dock Labour Board and the Chennai Port Trust.
and to issue a writ of mandamus forbearing the respondents from underoperating the vacant posts of Assistant Engineers (Civil) Class II as Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I, earmarked for departmental promotion, till the petitioner is promoted to the post of Assistant Engineers (Civil) Class II which has been earmarked for departmental promotion and consequently, direct the respondents to give such promotion to the petitioner by putting him in the appropriate place of the inter se/combined seniority list as may be prepared on a direction of this Court by reckoning the petitioner's original seniority in the feeder category of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was the employee of the Madras Dock Labour Board from 1998. By Scheme of Merger, the Madras Dock Labour Board came to be merged with Chennai Port Trust in 2001. By the Scheme of Merger dated 25.05.2001, the employees of the Madras Dock Labour Board came to be absorbed in Chennai Port Trust and became employees in the Chennai Port Trust thereafter. The petitioner, who was originally working as Supervisor Grade II was absorbed and redesignated as Junior Engineer (Civil), after merger. He was also promoted to the post of Junior Engineer (Civil) Grade I in 2006.
3. According to the petitioner, there was a memorandum of settlement between the management of Chennai Port Trust and the various Trade Unions dated 10.01.2014 under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. As per the settlement, it was agreed by the management to prepare a combined inter se seniority for integrated workers, employees, staff and officers between the employees who were inducted from erstwhile Madras Dock Labour Board and the existing employees of the Chennai Port Trust. However, according to the petitioner, though the original scheme of merger contemplated combined seniority of all the workers/employees/officers/staff so far, the Port Trust has not initiated any action for framing of combined seniority of the workers/employees/officers/staff. With the result, the Port Trust has been maintaining a separate roster as between the erstwhile employees of the Madras Dock Labour Board and the existing employees of the Chennai Port Trust separately and operating the roster for further appointments and promotion in the existing cadre.
4. According to the petitioner, there are 14 posts in the cadre of Assistant Engineer (Civil) Class II, which are vacant and if combined seniority has been prepared and maintained, he would have been eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) Class II. However, without preparing the combined seniority list, as contemplated in the scheme of merger dated 25.05.2001 and 18(1) settlement dated 10.01.2014, the second respondent was attempting to promote its own existing employees, overlooking the claim of the employees like the petitioner herein, who are inducted into the Chennai Port Trust by the scheme of merger. According to the petitioner, though there were many more vacancies available in the cadre of Assistant Engineer (Civil) Class II, the Port Trust was only operating restricted number of posts in order to exclude the employees like the petitioner herein from being considered for promotion.
5. In the above circumstances, the petitioner, on coming to know that the promotion panel was prepared on 11.09.2014 had approached this Court, challenging the panel insofar as not considering the claim of the employees like the petitioner herein. Although, at the time of admission of the writ petitions, this Court has permitted the Port Trust to make promotion to the higher cadres subject to the outcome of the writ petitions, it appears that the entire exercise of promotion has been put on hold in view of the pendency of the present writ petitions. In view of the said fact, respondents 5 to 54 got themselves impleaded on the ground that the entire promotion exercise has been stalled in view of the pendency of the litigation before this Court notwithstanding the order passed by the learned Judge, permitting the Port Trust to effect promotion pending disposal of the writ petitions.
6. Upon notice, Mr.V.Balasubramanian, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of the first respondent, Mr.M.Palanimuthu, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of respondents 2 to 4 and Mr.T.S.Raja Mohan, learned counsel entered appearance on behalf of respondents 5 to 54. Learned counsel for respondents 2 to 4 filed a counter affidavit, in which, in more than one paragraph, it is stated that the full integration could not take place between the employees who are inducted into the Port Trust from the erstwhile Madras Dock Labour Board and the original employees of the Port Trust in view of the strong objection from several trade unions. Other than the said reason, no other reason has been stated in the counter affidavit. In para 11 of the counter affidavit, it is averred as under:
“…… However, if the Hon’ble High Court pass any appropriate orders to merge the cadres of EDLB and Chennai Port Trust and fixing seniority by implementing the merger settlement dated 25.05.2001 that will be complied with and the petitioner’s case will be considered on merit in future. ”
7. Although this Court finds that there is no legal impediment for formulating the combined seniority between the employees, for some reason or the other, the same has not been done for all these years, which created lot of heartburn to one set of employees. Even otherwise, it has to be noted that in the absence of combined seniority list, the position of the employees is uncertain and unclear as to what is their position in the seniority list in their respective cadre. It is needless to mention that the promotion prospects are dependent on the assignment of seniority in the feeder cadre and in the absence of combined seniority list, there is an air of uncertainty among the employees.
8. On consideration of all the above facts and circumstances, there shall be a direction to respondents 2 and 3 to prepare a combined seniority list of all the workers/employees/staff/officers of both the erstwhile Madras Dock Labour Board and the original workers/employees/staff/officers of the Chennai Port Trust in each of the cadres and thereafter, effect promotion to the respective higher cadres. The said exercise shall be initiated and completed by the Port Trust within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that in case anyone is aggrieved by the preparation of combined seniority list, he/she is at liberty to approach this Court as he/she may be advised.
9. With these directions, the writ petitions stand disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
05.09.2017 Index:Yes/No mmi To
1. The Secretary to Government, Ministry of Shipping, Transport Bhavan, No.1, Parliamentary Street, New Delhi – 1.
2. The Chairman, Chennai Port Trust, No.1, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 1.
3. The Deputy Chairman cum Chairman of the Departmental Promotion Committee, Chennai Port Trust, No.1, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 1.
4. The Chief Engineer, Civil Engineering Department, Chennai Port Trust, No.1, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 1.
V.PARTHIBAN, J.
mmi W.P.Nos.27976 and 27977 of 2014 05.09.2017