S.Kalaimathi v. The State Of Tamilnadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 11.03.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SENTHILKUMAR S.Kalaimathi ..

Appellant Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. By its Secretary to Government Home (Police) Department Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Director General of Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore Chennai - 600 004.

3. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Police EVK Sampath Road, Periamet Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

..

Respondents Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 27.11.2025 made in W.P.No.46143 of 2025. For the Appellant :

Mr.Rajendraprasad K For the Respondents :

Mr.S.Yashwanth Additional Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) This intra-Court appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 27.11.2025 made in W.P.No.46143 of 2025.

2. That the present appellant was the writ petitioner, who was working in the respondent Department and due to desertion, she had been terminated from service in the year 2009. Having receipt of the said termination order, she has kept mum for sixteen long years and all of a sudden, on 13.10.2025, she made a representation to reinstate her on medical grounds and in order to consider the said representation, she has moved the said writ petition, seeking a mandamus, which was considered and rejected by the Writ Court through the order impugned.

3. Heard Mr.Rajendraprasad K, learned counsel appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner, who would submit that, since the appellant/writ petitioner was suffering with cancer, continuous treatment has been taken by her and since the employer had no occasion to consider this position, in order to consider the same, a representation, though belatedly has been given, the same ought to

have been directed to be considered. However, without considering it in proper perspective, the writ petition since has been dismissed by the Writ Court through the order impugned, it requires interference at the hands of this Division Bench, he contended.

4. We have considered the said submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/writ petitioner and we are not impressed with the same. Absolutely no plausible reason has been given as to why no action has been taken in making any request or representation with regard to the medical ground of the appellant/writ petitioner as against the order of termination, which was made in the year 2009. Therefore, after sixteen years, no sympathy could be shown by the Law Courts, as that would be a misplaced sympathy.

5. Therefore, the reasons given by the learned Judge in rejecting the said writ petition through the order impugned is fully justifiable and sustainable, hence, we do not want to interfere with the said order passed by the Writ Court. As a result of which, the writ appeal is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, it is dismissed. No costs.

6. The dismissal of this writ appeal would not stand in the way to re-agitate the issue by the appellant/writ petitioner pursuant to the reply issued by the respondents dated 24.10.2025, where, a liberty has been given to the appellant/writ petitioner to file a revision before the Director General of Police, Government of Tamil Nadu, Chennai, to redress her grievance.

7. Consequently, C.M.P.No.6746 of 2026 is closed. (R.S.K., J.) (N.S., J) 11.03.2026 Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No (drm)

To:

1. The Secretary to Government The State of Tamil Nadu Home (Police) Department Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Director General of Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore Chennai - 600 004.

3. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Police EVK Sampath Road, Periamet Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

AND N. SENTHILKUMAR, J.

(drm) 11.03.2026