Thiru. P.R.Ganesh MDS., v. The Tamil Nadu Public service commission

W.M.P. No.14403 of 2022 in W.P.No.15224 of 2022.

2. Brief Facts:

2.1. Petitioner was directly recruited to the post of Assistant Surgeon (Dental) in the Tamil Nadu Medical Service for the year 1997- 1998 by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC). As per merit, he secured 10th rank, but as per the roster system, he was placed at 46th position in the Selection List published by the Government in G.O. (3D) No. 16, Health and Family Welfare Department (B1 Department), dated 02.05.2000. Petitioner joined service on 01.09.2000, upon completion of the period of probation. Petitioner subsequently joined MDS course in 2004 as a Service Post Graduate and completed the same in March 2007. He is presently working as Senior Assistant Professor in the Department of Periodontics, Tamil Nadu Government Dental College and Hospital, Chennai-3.

2.2. The Director of Medical and Rural Health Services maintains the Civil Medical List (CML), which determines the inter se seniority of

4/13

Government doctors. It was submitted by petitioner that petitioner's seniority was first reflected in the Civil Medical List published on 01.06.2005. The dispute arises in the backdrop of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bimlesh Tanwar v. State of Haryana, (2003) 5 SCC 604, wherein it was held that seniority has to be determined on the basis of the order of merit in the selection list and not on roster points, wherever the seniority lists had been finalised after 10.03.2003, while clarifying that seniority lists finalised prior to the said date would remain undisturbed. According to petitioner, since the Civil Medical List reflecting petitioner's seniority was first published only on 01.06.2005, the Petitioner is entitled to re-fixation of seniority on the basis of merit, in terms of Bimlesh Tanwar.

3. Case of Petitioner:

3.1. Petitioner contended that the sole issue for consideration is whether his seniority was fixed before or after the cut-off date of 10.03.2003, as stipulated by Supreme Court in Bimlesh Tanwar v. State of

5/13

Haryana, (2003) 5 SCC 604. According to the petitioner, the Civil Medical List (CML), alone determines seniority and was first published only on 01.06.2005, a fact admitted by the fourth respondent in its counter affidavit. It was submitted that the selection list published by the TNPSC and the Government Order of appointment merely reflected the roster position and did not constitute a seniority list.

3.2. The petitioner further contended that the principles laid down in Bimlesh Tanwar were applied by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.2705 of 2012 and connected cases (2015 (4) MLJ 281), wherein it was held that seniority has to be determined on the basis of the merit list wherever the seniority list had been finalised after 10.03.2003. It was submitted that the said judgment has attained finality upon dismissal of the Special Leave Petitions by the Supreme Court and has subsequently been reiterated in the contempt proceedings before the Supreme Court, wherein it was clarified that only seniority lists finalised prior to 10.03.2003 are protected, while those finalised thereafter are liable to be revised on the basis of merit. Since the petitioner's seniority was

6/13

admittedly first fixed only in the Civil Medical List published on 01.06.2005, he is entitled to revision of his seniority in accordance with the aforesaid decisions.

3.3. The petitioner further contended that the stand taken by the first respondent that the recruitment pertaining to the 1997-1998 selection is outside the scope of the aforesaid directions is contrary to the categorical admission made by the fourth respondent that the petitioner's seniority was first fixed only in the year 2005. It was further submitted that the decisions relied upon by the respondents are distinguishable on facts, as those cases involved seniority lists which had already been revised in accordance with the law declared by the Supreme Court. On the above grounds, the petitioner prayed for revision of the seniority of Assistant Surgeons (Dental) recruited pursuant to the 1997-1998 selection on the basis of merit instead of roster points, with all consequential service benefits.

7/13

4. Case of Respondents:

4.1. Respondents contended that petitioner was appointed as Assistant Surgeon (Dental) pursuant to TNPSC selection for the year 1997-1998 and that his Civil Medical List (CML) number was assigned in accordance with the seniority determined by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission under the applicable service rules. It was submitted that the Civil Medical List maintained by the Director of Medical and Rural Health Services only reflects seniority assigned by the TNPSC and that the petitioner's CML numbers have been updated in the ordinary course.

4.2. It was further contended that the seniority assigned to the petitioner was in accordance with Rule 35(a) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules, which was subsequently incorporated as Section 40(1) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016. Reference was also made to the proceedings concerning the constitutional validity of the said provisions and the challenges carried before the Supreme Court.

8/13

4.3. The respondents further submitted that appointment seniority is not the sole criterion for promotion to the post of Associate Professor. It was contended that promotion is governed by the prescribed eligibility criteria, including possession of the requisite postgraduate qualification, the prescribed teaching experience and the required research publications. On the above grounds, the respondents prayed for dismissal of the writ petition and for vacating the interim order granted by this Court.

4.4. The first respondent contended that the petitioner's claim for revision of seniority is misconceived, as the recruitment pertaining to the petitioner belongs to the 1997-1998 selection, which is not covered by the directions issued by the Supreme Court for revision of seniority based on merit. It was submitted that, pursuant to the orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the seniority list has been revised on the basis of merit only in respect of recruitments for which the selection process was finalised after 10.03.2003, whereas the petitioner's selection is prior thus falls outside the said category.

9/13

4.5. The first respondent further relied upon the orders of Supreme Court in P.Madhu v. K. Nanda Kumar and the decisions of this Court in C. Sakthimurugan v. State of Tamil Nadu and A. Vennila v. State of Tamil Nadu to contend that seniority lists finalised prior to 10.03.2003 are not liable to be disturbed. It was therefore submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to seek revision of his seniority on the basis of merit, and the respondents are not in a position to accede to the relief sought. On the above grounds, the first respondent prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

5. Since the question as to whether seniority is to be determined on the basis of selection list published by TNPSC (or) Civil Medical List is yet to be even examined, this Court is inclined to direct the respondent to decide the basis on which seniority is to be determined. Thereafter, if it is found that seniority of petitioner is fixed after 10.03.2003, refix seniority list in accordance with direction issued by the Apex Court in the case of Bimlesh Tanwar case cited supra. Needless to state that petitioner would

10/13

be afforded an opportunity of hearing before Seniority fixation is finalised. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of 4 weeks from the date of uploading of order copy without waiting for the receipt of certified copy.

6. Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of and the Contempt Petition stands closed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

23.07.2026

Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No Speaking / Non Speaking order mrn/spp

11/13

To:

1.The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, Represented by its Secretary,

Frazer Bridge Road,

Chennai-600 003.

2.The State of Tamil Nadu,

Represented by its Principal Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat,

Fort St.George,

Chennai- 600 009.

3.The Director of Medical Education,

Kilpauk,

Chennai-600 010.

4.The Director of Medical & Rural Health Services, DMS Complex,

Teynampet, Chennai-600 006.

12/13

MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J

mrn/spp

WP No.15224 of 2022 and Cont No.3173 of 2025

23.07.2026

13/13