LexStreakRead free →
Madras High Court· 23 July 2026

Under the Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, does currency of punishment bar inclusion in a promotion panel even where the bar predates the Act?

P.Ashok Nataraja Additional Superintendent of Police, A1/6, AC Quarters, 3rd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040 v. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu By its Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009
WP No. 4543 of 2019 · WP No. 4543 of 2019
Coram: Justice S.M.Subramaniam · Justice N.Senthilkumar
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow Item (11) Part A of Schedule XI …📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Yes. Currency of punishment was a bar to grant of promotion under Government Orders even before the Conditions of Service Act, 2016 came into force, and this pre-existing bar was later incorporated as Item 11 Part A of Schedule XI to the Act.

Headnote

Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 — Schedule XI, Item 11, Part A — Promotion — Currency of punishment as bar — Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 — Schedule XI Item 11 — Promotion — Currency of punishment bars panel inclusion — Held: Promotion is not a vested right; consideration for promotion is a right of the employee, to be made in accordance with service records. Mere inclusion in a panel is procedural and confers no right, which accrues only on actual grant of promotion. (¶7) Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 — Schedule XI Item 11 — Retrospective effect — Pre-existing bar under Government Orders unaffected — Held further: Currency of punishment was a bar to promotion under Government Orders even prior to the Conditions of Service Act, 2016, and the challenge to Item 11 Part A of Schedule XI was not relevant since the punishment was imposed in 2005, before the panel year 2008-09 and before the Act itself. (¶5) Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 — Schedule XI Item 11 — Panel exclusion — Modified minor punishment does not entitle retrospective inclusion — Held further: Non-inclusion of the petitioner's name in the 2008-09 panel on the ground of currency of punishment was justified notwithstanding subsequent modification of the punishment to postponement of increment, and the Government's refusal to grant retrospective promotion warranted no interference. Writ petition dismissed. (¶6, 8)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 5The writ petition has been filed challenging Item (11) Part A of Schedule XI of Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016. As far as the above provision under the Act is concerned, even similar condition was available prior to the Conditions of Service Act. The Government issued directions to consider the officers for promotion by imposing terms and conditions. Currency of punishment even before the Conditions of Service Act was a bar for grant of promotion. Therefore, the challenge made regarding Item (11) Part A of Schedule XI of Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016 may not be relevant in the present case, since the punishment was imposed in the year 2005 and the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police is in the panel for the year 2008-09.
Paragraph 5Deputy Inspector General of Police, Coimbatore Range, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Coimbatore.
Acts & Sections
Item (11) Part A of Schedule XI of Tamilnadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of P.Ashok Nataraja Additional Superintendent of Police, A1/6, AC Quarters, 3rd Avenue, Anna Nagar, Chennai-600 040 v. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu By its Secretary, Department of Home, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009 — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Is promotion a vested right, or merely a right to be considered for promotion?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections