P.Jawahar, v. State Of Tamil Nadu,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.02.2018
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HULUVADI G.RAMESH AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RMT.TEEKAA RAMAN W.A.Nos.82 and 83 of 2018 and C.M.P.Nos.790, 791 of 2018 W.A.No.82 of 2018:
1.P.Jawahar 2.K.Murugesan 3.A.Peer Basha 4.S.Saravana Prabhu 5.P.Pandithurai 6.G.Ramesh Kumar 7.V.V.Sivakumar 8.S.Gnanaprakasam 9.K.Manikandan 10.S.Balasundaram .. Appellants/Petitioners 2,9 13, 15 to 18, 21, 24 & 25 Vs.
1.State of Tamil Nadu, rep.by Principal Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Chennai-600 004.
3.P.Stephen 4.V.Seetharaman 5.E.Mcclarine Eskhol 6.G.Augustine Paul Sudhakar 7.K.Sundararaj 8.A.Yakkoob 9.S.Unnikrishnan 10.S.Ramakrishnan 11.S.Namasivayam 12.R.Kumaresan 13.G.A.Kannan 14.V.Visweswarayya
15.K.Saravanan 16.P.Jayakumar 17.G.Chandiradhasan 18.M.Somasundaram 19.A.Philip Franklin Kennedy 20.R.Venugopal 21.T.Gopal 22.S.Baskaran 23.T.Mathialagan 24.V.Anil Kumar 25.R.Soundara Rajan 26.R.Chandra Sekharan 27.V.V.Thirumal 28.S.Justin Raj 29.N.Suriyamoorthy 30.S.Shanmugaiah 31.M.Prakash Babu 32.S.Panbalan 33.G.Balamurugan 34.K.Ramachandran 35.R.Srinivasalu 36.M.Annadurai 37.S.Prabhakaran 38.K.Balamurugan 39.M.Vivekanandan 40.S.Balakumar 41.S.Murugavel 42.N.Kottieswaran 43.R.Ravindran 44.S.Sathiyamoorthy 45.R.Alagesan 46.P.Karuppiah 47.B.Sridhar 48.K.Yuvaraj 49.N.Balasubramanian 50.R.Raj Babu 51.C.Velumani 52.N.Ravichandran 53.A.Rajendran 54.G.Hector Dharmaraj 55.R.Sankar 56.G.Palaniselvam 57.G.Velmurugan 58.T.Prabhaharan 59.C.Natesan 60.N.K.Selvaraj 61.S.Muthuvelpandi 62.P.Chandrasekaran 63.D.Kumar 64.I.Subbiah 65.N.Sugumar
66.M.Vetry Chezhian 67.R.Arnold Easter 68.M.Kumaraguruparan 69.K.Radhakrishnan 70.G.Krishnamoorthy 71.G.Harikumar 72.A.J.Ravikumaran 73.R.Ponnarasu 74.N.Arumugam 75.P.Kalaiselvan 76.P.K.Prakash 77.P.Gopalachandran 78.K.Sankar 79.S.Ramesh Babu 80.A.Antony Ari 81.K.Kanagaraj Joseph 82.R.Muthamilselvan 83.D.Suresh 84.S.Soundararajan 85.M.Sivanupandian 86.M.Muthukumar 87.A.Manikandan 88.K.Asokan 89.G.Mathialagan 90.H.Krishnamurthi, S/o.Hallan 91.S.J.Johan Kennedy 92.A.V.Elamurugan 93.R.Mathialagan 94.B.Mathew David 95.M.Chellamuthu 96.P.Kumaran 97.M.Jeevanandam 98.G.Pugazhvendhan 99.G.Pravinkumar 100.A.Sivarajan 101.A.T.Jaikumar 102.M.Balasubramanian 103.K.Suthakar 104.A.Arularasu Justin 105.M.Venkatesan 106.K.Ramamoorthi 107.M.Gunasekaran 108.M.Loganathan 109.M.Arivazhagan 110.A.T.Ramachandran 111.C.V.Vijayakumar 112.Sridharan 113.V.E.Senthil 114.N.Karunakaran 115.S.Murugan 116.R.Ramesh
117.V.S.G.Suresh 118.M.T.Irudhayaraj 119.K.Annadurai 120.K.Nivazhgan 121.M.Vijayakumar 122.R.Chinnaraj 123.G.Annadurai 124.K.Sridharan 125.K.Thangavel 126.M.N.Viswanath Jayan 127.T.Saravanan 128.S.Seenivasan 129.S.Krishnan 130.D.Kandasamy ..(Respondents 1 to 130/Respondents 131.S.Charles Sam Rajadurai 1 to 130 132.R.Vencent 133.M.Justin Prabakaran 134.K.R.Jaisingh 135.S.Sampath Kumar 136.Pon Durai Pandian 137.K.Sasikumar 138.C.Umapathy 139.S.Saravana Devendran 140.R.Senthil 141.D.Selvakan David 142.R.Nithikumar 143.R.Ramesh Kannan 144.A.Murugan 145.P.Anand .. Respondents 131 to145/ Petitioners 1,3 to 8 10 to 12 14, 19, 20,22 & 23 (Respondents 131 to 145 are given up in the above Writ Appeal since they are petitioners in WP and no relief sought for against them) W.A.No.83 of 2018:
1.P.Jawahar/ 2.S.Saravana Prabhu 3.P.Pandithurai 4.G.Ramesh Kumar 5.S.Balasundaram 6.V.V.Sivakumar 7.S.Gnanaprakasam 8.A.Peer Basha 9.K.Murugesan 10.K.Manikandan .. Appellants/Petitioners Vs.
1.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
2.The Director General of Police, No.601, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
3.P.Kodilingam ...1 to 3 Respondents/ 1 to 3 Respondents 4.E.Kanagaraj 5.M.Royappan Yesunesan 6.S.Senthil 7.D.Gowthaman 8.V.Tamilvanan (Respondents 4 to 8 impleaded as per order passed by this Court dated 07.02.2018 in C.M.P.No.2489 of 2018 in W.A.No.83/2018)...4 to 8 Respondents/ Proposed Respondents 4 to 8 Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the orders passed by this Court dated 21.12.2017 in W.P.Nos.14207 of 2016 and 29487 of 2017, respectively. WP.No.14207 of 2016:Calling for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings in Home (Police-2) Department Police Note No.1 dt.13.01.2016 issued by the 1st respondent and consequential proceedings in R.C.No.00878/ NGB.I(1)/2016 dated 01.02.
2016 issued by the 2nd respondent and quash the same in respect of the respondents 3 to 89 who are in Serial Number 22 to 108 in impugned Proceedings in Home (Police-2) Department Police Note No.1 dt.13.01.2016 issued by the 1st respondent and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to promote the petitioners temporarily from Inspectors to Deputy Superintendent of Police as recommended by the 2nd respondent in R.C.No.109372/ NGB.I(1)/ 05 dated 23.02.
WP.No.29487/2017:calling for the records pertaining to impunged proceedings issued in Police Note No.15 Home (Police -2) Department dated 03.11.2017 passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently promote the petitioners to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police W.A.No.82 of 2018:
For Appellants : Mr.K.Doraisamy, Sr.Counsel for Mrs.Muthumani Doraisamy For Respondents : Mr.S.T.S.Murthi, Addl.Advocate General assisted by Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram, Spl.GP for R1 and R2 Mr.P.Wilson, Sr.Counsel for Mr.G.Sankaran for R3 to R145 W.A.No.83 of 2018:
For Appellants : Mr.S.Prabakaran, Sr.Counsel and Mr.D.Selvam for Mrs.Muthumani Doraisamy For Respondents : Mr.S.T.S.Murthi, Addl.Advocate General assisted by Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram, Spl.GP for R1 and R2 Mr.P.Wilson, Sr.Counsel for Mr.G.Sankaran for R3 Mr.M.Ravi for R4 to R8 COMMON JUDGMENT (Delivered by HULUVADI G.RAMESH, J.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides for some time.
2.In respect of the issue as to whether the incumbents who were part of Special Task Force involved in killing of the notorious forest brigand Veerappan and his gang, and were given 'one stage accelerated promotion' by executive orders, can claim consequential seniority in the accelerated promotional post over their senior lower category and also with regard to the validity of G.O.Ms.No.1396 Home Department dated 03.10.2007, a Division Bench of this Court, earlier, passed a common judgment in
W.A.Nos.849 to 854 of 2010, etc.batch, dated 05.04.2013, in which it has been observed as under:- "139. Conclusion:- W.A.Nos.849 to 854 and 2066 of 2010:
Accelerated promotion was without reference to the statutory rules or G.O.Ms.No.468, Home, dated 19.3.1996. The appellants and other police personnel were not promoted to the substantive posts but were accommodated by creation of supernumerary posts. Since there was ambiguity over panel position of the accelerated promotees vis-a-vis regular promotees, considering the representation given by the police officers, Government rightly issued G.O.Ms.No.1396 Home dated 3.10.2007 deleting paragraph No.5(e) in G.O.Ms.No.1252, Home, dated 29.10.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.1346, Home, dated 6.12.2004. Government was well within its powers in deleting Paragraph No.5(e) in G.O.Ms.No.1252, Home, dated 29.10.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.1346, Home, dated 6.12.2004 and clarifying the position by substituting a new one in G.O.Ms.No.1396, Home, dated 3.10.
2007 restoring the original seniority. The learned single Judge rightly dismissed the Writ Petitions and we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned single Judge warranting interference and all the Writ Appeals are dismissed. The order of status quo granted on 2.8.2012 is vacated.
Consequently, the Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos.25736 to 25741 of 2010 are dismissed.
140. W.P.Nos.17731, 20728 of 2012 and W.P.(MD) No.8911 of 2012: The impugned G.O.Ms.No.332 Home (Pol.1A) Department dated 03.5.2012 had directly dealt with the subject matter pending before the Division Bench sitting over the judgment of the learned single Judge. The grant of stay in Writ Appeals will not confer any right on the Government to pass the impugned G.O. Ms.No.332 Home (Pol.1A) Department dated 03.5.2012 independently and the impugned G.O.Ms.No.332 Home (Pol.1A) Department dated 03.5.2012 is quashed and all these Writ Petitions are allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions in all the Writ Appeals and in all the Writ Petitions shall stand dismissed."
3.The persons who had worked in the task force had been given one time accelerated promotion, irrespective of the cadre. But the earlier Division Bench judgment of this Court, as extracted supra, is to the effect that the original seniority
should not be disturbed. In this connection, in the order passed by the learned single Judge which is under challenge in these appeals, a direction was given to the official respondents to proceed ahead to fill up all the vacancies by way of preparing a final seniority list as per the existing Rules, without reference to the accelerated promotion, with a further observation that the same is subject to the result of the pending writ petitions. According to the learned senior counsels appearing for the appellants in these writ appeals, it is in total negation of the service jurisprudence. However, it is also submitted that some of the persons have been given promotion out of turn, on the basis of the earlier Government Order, wherein they have been given one time accelerated promotion. Further, it is submitted that regular promotions were also given in addition to the accelerated promotion.
4.Since already a view has been taken by the earlier Division Bench of this Court in the judgment made in W.A.Nos.849 to 854 of 2010, etc.batch, dated 05.04.2013, in order to arrive at a conclusion in the matter, either the parties have to challenge the said order passed by the earlier Division Bench before the Hon'ble Apex Court by filing petitions for condoning the delay or they have to approach the Government by way of making representations, seeking to clarify the issue. 5.Thus, these writ appeals are disposed of with a direction to the appellants and the contesting private respondents to approach the Government by making representations and it is for the Government to consider their cases individually in accordance with law and as per the ratio laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the judgment made in W.A.Nos.849 to 854 of 2010, etc.batch, dated 05.04.2013, as early as possible. Consequently the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar KM
To 1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department, Secretariat, Fort St.George, Chennai-9.
3.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Chennai-600 004.
+1 cc to the Govt Pleader sr 9704 +2 ccs to Mr.Muthumani Duraisami Advocate sr 9441 +1cc to Mr.M.Ravi Advocate sr 9258 +1 cc to M/s.G.Sankaran Advocate sr 10121 dated 26/06/2018 W.A.Nos.82 and 83 of 2018 and C.M.P.Nos.790, 791 of 2018 km(co) aa07/03/2018