Transfer-counselling priority is governed by station seniority, not State seniority.

The appellant, an Assistant Surgeon, challenged a revised transfer-counselling seniority list that gave the sixth respondent priority for posting at Ramanathapuram.

Both had been transferred on 16 August 2023, but the sixth respondent was relieved only on 25 October 2023 and joined the next day.

In earlier proceedings, the sixth respondent obtained a direction to count her seniority from the transfer date; that direction was affirmed in W.A.(MD) No. 1366 of 2024.

The appellant’s writ petition challenging the revised list was dismissed, leading to this appeal.

Whether transfer-counselling priority was governed by station seniority rather than the appellant’s claimed superior State seniority.

Whether the sixth respondent’s selection for posting at Ramanathapuram, made pursuant to the earlier litigation and transfer counselling, should be given effect despite the appellant’s challenge.

The Court applied the distinction between State seniority and station seniority, holding that station seniority determines priority when employees seek transfer to the same place through transfer counselling.

It also relied on the earlier Division Bench decision in W.A.(MD) No. 1366 of 2024, which affirmed that the sixth respondent’s seniority was to be counted from her transfer date, 16 August 2023.

Although the appellant was senior to the sixth respondent in the State seniority lists, the Court considered station seniority decisive for transfer counselling.

Both employees had been transferred on the same date, and the sixth respondent’s delayed relief had already been addressed in the earlier proceedings.

The Court also noted that the appellant’s deputation at Madurai Medical College could not count towards station seniority, while the sixth respondent had been selected for Ramanathapuram in the counselling process.

The authorities were required to give effect to that decision and the prior court directions.

It dismissed the writ appeal, with no order as to costs, and directed the authorities to issue orders in accordance with the counselling decision and the circular dated 1 April 2025, within three weeks.