W.A.No.1297 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 01.06.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR W.A.No.1297 of 2026 and C.M.P.No.12235 of 2026 1. S.Devadoss S/o.Soosai 2. Krishnan S/o.Arjunan 3. Sadatharan S/o.Manjini 4. Elango S/o.Pakkiri ... Appellants vs. 1. Union Territory of Puducherry Rep. By its Under Secretary to the Department Local Administration Department Puducherry. 2. The Director Local Administration Department Puducherry. Page Nos.1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1297 of 2026 3. The Commissioner Puducherry Municipality Puducherry. 4. P.Kezendirane S/o.Vinayagam 5. K.Balabaskaran S/o.Kalivarathan 6. R.Vijaya D/o.Rajasegaran 7. V.Nalina D/o.Venni Tandabany 8. S.Soubalatchoamy D/o.Sundaramoorthy 9. V.Rajendiran S/o.Vinayagam 10. S.Jayanthy W/o.Balabaskaran 11. S.Arikrishnan S/o.Singaravelu 12. A.Bathmavady D/o.Archunan 13. M.Ravichandiran S/o.Mahalingam 14. D.Govindan S/o.Dhandapani Page Nos.2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1297 of 2026 15. DJ.Tayanayaguy D/o.Janbarthanan 16. M.Kumaresan S/o.Murugesan 17. S.Venkataparamanandam S/o.Selvaraj 18. T.Parthiban S/o.Tamilarasan 19. S.Jagadiswari S/o.Subramanian 20. S.Rajasekaran S/o.Sundaramoorthy 21. Irusappan S/o.Rajagopal 22. G.Sampath S/o.Govindaraj 23. D.Varadhan S/o.Dhanapal 24. T.Gajendran S/o.Thangavelu 25. Narayanasamy S/o.Arunachalam 26. P.Venkatesa Perumal S/o.Pushpam … Respondents Page Nos.3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1297 of 2026 Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 16.02.2026 in W.P.No.28125 of 2015 on the file of this Hon’ble Court. For Appellants : Mr.K.S.Ilangovan for M/s.Achari and Antoni Associates For Respondents : Mr.R.Sreedhar Additional Government Pleader (Puducherry) for R1 to R3 ***** J U D G M E N T [Made by S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.,] By consent, the present writ appeal is taken up for final disposal. 2. The writ petitioners are the appellants in the present intra-Court appeal. The relief sought for in the writ petition is to direct the official respondents to consider the case of the appellants for promotion to the post of Work Inspector as per the Rules. 3. The writ Court dismissed the writ petition mainly on the ground of locus standi. 4. The learned counsel for the appellants would mainly contend that the appellants were initially appointed as Gangmen and the next avenue Page Nos.4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1297 of 2026 for promotion available to them is the post of Work Inspector. As per G.O.Ms.No.31 dated 31.12.2025, the Rules regulating the method of recruitment to the post of Work Inspector in the Municipalities and Commune Panchayats of the Union Territory of Puducherry were issued. The method of recruitment, age limit and other qualifications are prescribed therein. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants would further contend that the Rules provide 20% of the vacancies to be filled by promotion from among eligible persons holding the post of Gangman. Therefore, the appellants are eligible for promotion to the post of Work Inspector. Instead of considering the appellants for promotion, the official respondents are proceeding to appoint fresh candidates through direct recruitment for the post of Work Inspector. 6. The promotion per se cannot be claimed as an absolute right. However, consideration for promotion is a fundamental right of an employee. Whenever the Rules contemplate recruitment by promotion / direct recruitment, such Rules are binding on the employer and the cases of in-service employees are required to be considered for promotion in consonance with the Rules in force. The grievance of the appellants is that they have not even been considered for promotion to the post of Work Page Nos.5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1297 of 2026 Inspector in accordance with the Service Rules in force. 7. That being the factum, this Court is inclined to consider the present writ appeal. Accordingly, the writ order impugned dated 16.02.2026 made in W.P.No.28125 of 2015 is set aside. The official respondents 1 to 3 are directed to consider the case of the appellants for promotion to the post of Work Inspector strictly in accordance with the recruitment Rules applicable for the post of Work Inspector in the Municipalities and Commune Panchayats, based on eligibility and by following the other criteria prescribed for such promotion. The appellants shall be considered against the vacancies earmarked for the promotion from the cadre of Gangmen to the post of Work Inspector in accordance with the Rules. 8. With the above directions, the Writ Appeal stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 01.06.2026 Index : Yes Neutral Citation : Yes / No Speaking order mk Page Nos.6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1297 of 2026 To 1. Union Territory of Puducherry Rep. By its Under Secretary to the Department Local Administration Department Puducherry. 2. The Director Local Administration Department Puducherry. 3. The Commissioner Puducherry Municipality Puducherry. Page Nos.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.A.No.1297 of 2026 S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, J., and N.SENTHILKUMAR, J., mk W.A.No.1297 of 2026 01.06.2026 Page Nos.8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis