Service right in the former service permits rejoining within one year of relief.

The petitioner was appointed as a Fireman in the Tamil Nadu Fire and Rescue Services Department on 09.06.2022 and completed his probation.

After obtaining prior departmental permission, he participated in the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission’s Combined Civil Services Examination–IV and was selected as a Typist in the Judicial Department.

He was posted to the District Munsif Court, Uthangarai, relieved from the Fire and Rescue Services Department on 16.04.2025, and joined the Judicial Department on 17.04.2025.

Subsequently, for personal reasons, he sought permission from the Principal District Judge to be relieved from the Judicial Department and rejoin the Fire and Rescue Services Department.

The Principal District Judge rejected the request by a non-speaking order dated 07.10.2025.

The Fire and Rescue Services Department had separately granted permission for the petitioner to rejoin as Fireman by proceedings dated 08.10.2025.

Whether the petitioner retained a service right in his former post under Section 14 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, when he sought relief from the Judicial Department within one year of being relieved from the Fire and Rescue Services Department.

Whether the Principal District Judge was justified in rejecting the petitioner’s request to be relieved by a non-speaking order, despite the former department’s permission to permit his rejoining.

The Court primarily applied Section 14 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, which preserves a government servant’s service right in the former service for a period not exceeding one year from the date of relief when the servant is selected by direct recruitment for appointment to another government service or specified public organisation.

The Court also applied the requirement that an administrative order affecting service rights must disclose reasons and be consistent with the governing statutory provision.

A non-speaking order inconsistent with Section 14 and the decision of the former department permitting rejoining cannot be sustained.

The petitioner was relieved from the Fire and Rescue Services Department on 16.04.2025 and submitted his request to the Principal District Judge on 01.09.2025, well within the one-year period prescribed by Section 14.

Accordingly, he continued to possess a statutory service right in his former service.

The Fire and Rescue Services Department had also granted permission for him to rejoin as Fireman.

In these circumstances, the Principal District Judge’s non-speaking rejection did not properly consider the statutory protection under Section 14 or the permission granted by the former department.

The order was therefore inconsistent with the statutory scheme and could not be sustained.

The impugned order dated 07.10.2025 was set aside, and the writ petition was allowed.

The Principal District Judge was directed to relieve the petitioner from service, following the applicable procedures, within one week from receipt of the Court’s order.

No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.