Is the State a single unit for appointment, promotion, transfer and discharge for all posts in the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service?

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present batch of writ petitions have been instituted challenging G.O. (4D) No.1, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.01.2025, and the consequential order passed in G.O.(D) No.287, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 24.05.2025, and for a consequential direction to prepare an inter-se seniority list amongst the Assistant Executive Engineers based on the date of appointment in the category of Assistant Engineer.

The dispute arises for grant of promotion to various posts including Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineers and Assistant Executive Engineers in Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies.

The crux of the issue is that appointments and promotions are made overlooking the seniority and without reference to the date of initial appointment in respective Municipalities, Corporations etc., for the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer, for which, State is the unit. Thus, the disparity arose on account of such promotions, resulted in institution of various writ petitions before the High Court. Government has amended Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Rules, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 2023) by inserting a new Rule 192A vide G.O.Ms.No.162, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 05.11.2024. The writ petitions challenging the amended Rule 192A of the Rules, 2023 were mostly withdrawn by the petitioners and one writ petition was dismissed by the Court in W.P. No.974 of 2025. Therefore, the present writ petitions are to be considered based on Rules 202, 205, 206 and 192A of the Rules, 2023, and based on the decisions taken by the Government in exercise of the powers conferred under the Act and the Rules.

The respective learned counsels appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners namely Mr.V.Vijayashankar, Mr.T.Ranganathan, Mr.M.Mahamani and Mr.S.N.Ravichandran would mainly contend that disparity and discrimination in grant of promotion resulted in multiple writ petitions. The spirit of the rules are flouted by the authorities while considering the cases of eligible officers for promotion to the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer. In Chennai Corporation itself, junior officers are promoted to the higher posts overlooking the seniority, which is a heart burning issue amongst the officials. Therefore, the present writ petitions are to be considered.

However, the petitioners have no serious objection in following the ratio as fixed by the Government. But their concern is to ensure that the provisions under the Act, Rules and the ratio fixed by the Government are to be scrupulously followed for fixing of inter-se seniority and to grant promotion to various posts including the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer.

The learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State would submit that the authorities competent are bound to follow the provisions of the Act, Rules as well as the Government Orders passed in the matter of grant of promotion. Equal opportunity for promotion is to be ensured, and the Government is inclined to follow the ratio fixed in G.O.(4D) No.01, dated 07.01.2025. On account of some writ petitions filed and due to interim orders, they are not in a position to complete the entire exercise, and on account of the fact that G.O.(4D) No.01, 07.01.2025 itself is under challenge.

The learned Additional Advocate General regarding the challenge made by the petitioners on fixing the ratio for grant of promotion relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Saurabh Chaudri and Others vs. Union of India and Others ¹. The principles for deciding the constitutional validity of the statutes and rules have been laid down by the Apex Court in paragraphs 66 and 67. In the case of Union of India and Others vs. Cosmo Films Limited², the principles laid down in the case of Saurabh Chaudri has been reiterated by the Apex Court in paragraph 62.

Relying on the said judgments, the learned Additional Advocate General would submit that few grievances or difficulty of employees cannot be a ground to invalidate any of the provisions of the statute or Rules. The constitutional validity and principles of reasonableness adopted by the Government for grant of promotions uniformly to all the employees is to be taken into consideration.

In the present case, the Government found a workable solution by fixing an inter-se seniority amongst the officers and grant promotion by fixing ratio considering the sanctioned strength particularly in Greater Chennai Corporation, other Corporations and Municipalities. Thus, the Government Order issued in G.O.(4D) No.01, dated 07.01.2025 is intended to remove the disparity and to ensure equal promotional opportunities to all the eligible officers. Individual grievances may not stand in the way of struck down provisions of the amended Rules as well as the consequential G.O. issued in G.O.(4D) No.1 dated 07.01.2025.

Let us now consider the provisions under the Rules. Sub-rule (2) to Rule 202 stipulates that, “The preparation of seniority lists and inter-se seniority lists of all the employees under Parts II, III, IV and V of this Chapter in respect of all posts in this Chapter shall be completed and then regular promotions, appointments, recruitment by transfer etc., shall be given effect from the date of notification.”

Sub-Rule (3) to Rule 202 reiterates that, “the inter-se seniority of a member of service under the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service, Tamil Nadu Municipal Corporation Service, Tamil Nadu Municipal Council Service and Tamil Nadu Town Panchayat Service shall be fixed by taking into consideration the provisions contained in the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 (Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 2016).”

Rule 205 speaks about appointing authority, disciplinary authority and appellate authority / reviewing authority. Rule 206 denotes unit for appointment, transfer and postings. It states that the State shall be a single unit for appointment, promotion, reversion, transfer and discharge for all the posts in the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service.

In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 198 of Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, 1998, an amendment to the Rules, 2023 was notified vide G.O.Ms.No.162, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 05.11.2024.

Amended Rule 192A speaks about Fixation of Seniority. Sub-Rule (5) to Rule 192A is to be applied in respect of the facts involved in the present batch of petitions.

Sub-Rule (5) reads as under, “In case of posts included in the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service, the order of rotation in which the said posts may be filled from the feeder categories of such posts in Tamil Nadu Municipal Corporation Service, Tamil Nadu Municipal Council Service and Tamil Nadu Town Panchayat Service shall be in such manner as may be ordered by Government from time to time.”

In order to give effect to Rule 206, read with amended Rule 192A(5), the Government issued G.O.(4D) No.1, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.01.2025, fixing ratio for grant of promotion to the eligible officers working in Municipal Councils, various Corporations across the State and Greater Chennai Corporation.

Disparity in grant of promotion and discrimination in grant of promotion resulted in institution of multiple writ petitions. The spirit of the Rules are flouted by the authorities, while considering the cases of eligible officers for promotion to the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer.

Rule 206 of the Rules, 2023 contemplates that “State shall be a single unit for appointment, promotion, reversion, transfer and discharge for all the posts in the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service.”

Sub-Rule (5) to Rule 192A reiterates that “the posts included in the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service, the order of rotation in which the said posts may be filled from the feeder categories of such posts in Tamil Nadu Municipal Corporation Service, Tamil Nadu Municipal Council Service and Tamil Nadu Town Panchayat Service shall be in such manner as may be ordered by the Government from time to time.”

In exercise of the powers conferred under above provisions, the Government issued G.O.(4D) No.01, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.01.2025. The objects and reasons for fixing ratio have been set out in the Government Order, and it would be relevant to consider those objectives.

As per Rule 205 of the Rules, 2023 Government is the appointing authority for the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer. State shall be the single unit for appointment, promotion, transfer under Rule 206. Rule 192A is for fixation of seniority in order to follow rationale in fixation of inter-se seniority and equalize the promotional opportunities amongst the employees in the Town Panchayats, Municipal Councils and other Municipal Corporations including Greater Chennai Corporation included in the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service based on the sanctioned strength of posts being governed under the Tamil Nadu Municipal Service, which is a State common service.

Considering the above provisions and the powers conferred on the Government under Rule 206, the Government decided to fix ratio in the Government Order initially issued in G.O.(4D) No.32, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 11.11.2024. There may be some ambiguities in fixing the inter-se seniority of feeder category belonging to Municipal Councils and Corporations other than Greater Chennai Corporation. Thus, the Government fixed ratio for preparation of inter-se seniority for promotion to the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer and accordingly revised the ratio originally fixed in G.O.(Ms) No.32, 11.11.2024 and issued G.O.(4D) No.01, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.01.2025.

The revised ratio is fixed as under: SI.N Name of Sanctioned Strength Proposed Ratio for o the Post Promotion Directorate ofGreater Directorate of Greater Municipal Chennai Municipal Chennai AdministrationCoporati Administration Corporati Municipal Other on Municipal Other on Council Corpo Council Corp (inclusive ration (inclusive oratio of O/o s of O/o ns Director of Director of Town Town Panchayat Panchaya s) ts) 1. Chief 1 5 5 1 2 3 Engineer 2. Superinten 4 6 9 1 2 3 ding Engineer 3. Executive 32 70 58 1 2 2 Engineer 4. Assistant 98 65 146 3 2 5 Executive Engineer

When the ratio for preparation of inter-se seniority for promotion has been fixed as stated above, Government further stipulates rotation based on ratio 3:2:1 for Greater Chennai Corporation, Directorate of Municipal Administration (Other Corporations) and Directorate of Municipal Administration (Municipal Councils, inclusive of incumbents working in Directorate of Town Panchayats). The rotation is fixed as under: Chief Engineer Ratio 3:2:1 for Greater Chennai Corporation, Directorate of Municipal Administration (Other Corporations) and Directorate of Municipal. Administration (Municipal Council inclusive of incumbents working in Directorate of Town Panchayats). 1st vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation 2nd vacancy: Other Corporations 3rd vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation 4th vacancy: Municipal Council 5th vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation 6th vacancy: Other Corporations and so on. Superintending Engineer (Ratio 3:2:1 for Greater Chennai Corporation, Directorate of Municipal Administration (Other Corporations) and Directorate of Municipal Administration (Municipal Council inclusive of incumbents working in Directorate of Town Panchayats) 1st vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation 2nd vacancy: Other Corporations 3rd vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation 4th vacancy: Municipal Council 5th vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation 6th vacancy: Other Corporations and so on. Executive Engineer (Ratio 2:2:1 for Directorate of Municipal Administration (Other Corporations), Greater Chennai Corporation and Directorate of Municipal Administration (Municipal Council inclusive of incumbents working in Directorate of Town Panchayats) 1st vacancy: Other Corporations 2nd vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation 3rd vacancy: Municipal Council 4th vacancy: Other Corporations 5th vacancy: Greater Chennai Corporation and so on Assistant Executive Engineer (Ratio 5:3:2 for Greater Chennai Corporation, Directorate of Municipal Administration (Municipal Council inclusive of incumbents working in Directorate of Town Panchayats) and Directorate of Municipal Administration (Other Corporations) 1st vacancy Greater Chennai 6th vacancy Greater Chennai Corporation Corporation 2nd vacancy Municipal Council 7th vacancy Other Corporations 3rd vacancy Other Corporations 8th vacancy Greater Chennai Corporation 4th vacancy Greater Chennai 9th vacancy Municipal Council Corporation 5th vacancy Municipal Council 10th Greater Chennai vacancy Corporation and so on

Following the above ratio fixed for preparation of inter-se seniority, the Director of Municipal Administration is asked to prepare draft inter-se seniority list based on ratio and rotation as stipulated in G.O.(4D) No.01, dated 07.01.2025 and send necessary proposal to Government for finalization of inter-se seniority for grant of promotion to the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer from the respective feeder categories.

The learned Additional Advocate General would submit that the inter-se seniority in G.O.(D) No.287, Municipal Administration and Water Supply (MC.5) Department, dated 24.05.2025 and promotions are also granted in G.O.Ms.No.57, dated 04.08.2026. Some of the aggrieved officers have challenged the promotion order issued in G.O.Ms.No.57, dated 04.08.2026 and those writ petitions are pending.

Opposing the said arguments of the learned Additional Advocate General, the learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the inter-se seniority list was not properly fixed nor the promotions are granted in accordance with the ratio fixed as per G.O.(4D) No.01, dated 07.01.2025.

May that as it be. This Court is of the considered view that now legal position for fixation of inter-se seniority and grant of promotions in the context of provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act, Rules and Government policies of fixing ratio have been not seriously disputed between the parties. However, there are some grievances exist in the matter of fixing the inter-se seniority.

The disparity, if any, in the matter of fixation of inter-se seniority is to be addressed by the Government for rectification. If at all any promotions are granted contrary to the provisions of the Act and Rules 206 and 192A(5) and the consequential Government policy of fixing rotation, then such cases are also to be reviewed by correcting the inter-se seniority list and by initiating appropriate actions to undo the irregular promotions, if any granted, contrary to the violation of the Rules and Government policy of fixation of ratio. VI. LEGAL POSITION REGARDING THE CHALLENGE MADE IN RESPECT OF THE RATIO FIXED BY THE GOVERNMENT IN G.O.(4D).No.01,

The Constitution Bench judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Saurabh Choudri cited supra rules as follows:

In the case of Cosmo Films cited supra, the Hon’ble Supreme Court reiterated about the legal position as follows:

In view of the legal principles settled by the Apex Court, the ratio fixed by the Government in order to eliminate inequality in the matter of grant of promotion in G.O.(4D) No.01, dated 07.01.2025 cannot be said to be infirm or in violation of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Urban Local Bodies Act and the Rules framed thereunder. In exercise of the powers conferred under the amended Rule 192A(5), the Government issued orders in G.O.(4D) No.01, fixing Ratio and Rotation for grant of promotion, and the objectives for fixation of such ratio has been discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs as stated in the Government Order, which is sound enough to arrive at a conclusion that there is no infirmity or illegality in fixing ratio for grant of promotion amongst the eligible officers from the feeder category and by fixing inter-se seniority.

Thus, this Court upholds the validity of G.O.(4D) No.01, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.01.2025.

Question arises, whether the implementation has been properly done by the Government while fixing inter-se seniority and while granting promotion to the eligible officers based on the inter-se seniority list?

Inter-se seniority list published by the Government in G.O.(D) No.287, dated 24.05.2025 itself is under challenge by way of writ proceedings. The consequential promotions granted in G.O.Ms.No.57, dated 04.08.2026 is also under challenge in few writ petitions. However, the issues raised in the present writ petitions cannot be separated from the issues raised in those writ petitions, since both are interlinked, and the common issue relates to grant of promotion to the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineers. There is a consensus between the parties to the lis that preparation of inter-se seniority list and grant of promotion must be done strictly in accordance with Rule 192A(5) and the ratio fixed by the Government in G.O.(4D) No.01, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.01.2025.

The respective learned counsel for the petitioners would urge this Court that inter-se seniority was not fixed properly. The grievances of the officers in the matter of fixation of seniority was not considered by the Government, which resulted in institution of writ proceedings. Consequently, promotions granted based on such erroneous fixation of inter-se seniority deprived the rightful opportunity of eligible officials, waiting for promotion to the higher posts.

Promotion per se is not a vested right of an employee. However, consideration for promotion is a fundamental right of an employee. All promotions are to be granted strictly in accordance with the Rules applicable to the particular posts. Now that the Government formed a policy for grant of promotion to these categories, namely Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer. Thus, the Act, Rules as well as the policy adopted for grant of promotion by fixing an inter-se seniority are to be scrupulously followed by the Government. The litigations arose on account of some disparity in the inter-se seniority list and the consequential promotions granted. These issues are to be resolved in the interest of public administration and to ensure equal opportunity in promotion to all the eligible officers.

In view of the above discussions on facts and legal position, this Court is inclined to issue the following directions: (i). The first respondent is directed to issue a circular to all the Local Bodies across the State, affording opportunity to all the officers to submit their respective objections, if any, regarding the inter-se seniority list already published by the Government. (ii). On receipt of objections, if any, the Government is directed to consider their objections, and verify the correctness of the inter-se seniority list already published. If any error is identified in fixing inter-se seniority, all such errors are to be corrected and revised inter-se seniority list is to be published. (iv). Thereafter, first respondent is directed to review the promotions already granted and its correctness based on the revised inter-se seniority list to be published by completing the above process. If any errors, irregularities in grant of promotions are identified, all such errors are to be rectified and suitable orders are to be passed by the Government. (v). By correcting the inter-se seniority list and rectifying the errors, if any, in the matter of grant of promotions, all further promotions to the posts of Chief Engineer, Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer and Assistant Executive Engineer shall be granted by scrupulously following the procedures as contemplated under the Act, Rules and Government policies in the matter of grant of promotions. (vi). The entire exercise is directed to be completed within a period of four (04) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. (vii). Learned Additional Advocate General and the respective Counsels are requested to furnish the copy of this order before the writ Court for disposal of all pending writ petitions enabling the Government to complete the exercise within the stipulated period.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are disposed of, upholding the validity of G.O. (4D) No.1, Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department, dated 07.01.2025. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.) 03-09-2026