Madras High CourtWP/16702/2007disposed of

P. Sakthivel v. Director General Of Police

2015-01-07Honourable Mr Justice T.Raja2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 07.01.2015 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. RAJA W.P.NO. 16702 OF 2007 (O.A. No. 3204 of 2003) P. Sakthivel .. Petitioner Vs.

1. The Director General of Police Chennai -4.

2. The Inspector General of Police Armed Police Chennai-10.

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Armed Police (M & W) Trichy -12.

4. The Commandant TSP XI Battalion Rajapalayam .. Respondents PRAYER: This Writ Petition came to be numbered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by way of transfer of O.A. No.3204 of 2003 from the file of Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer to call for the records relating to the impugned orders passed by the fourth respondent herein in his proceedings in P.R. No. 3/2000 u/r. 3 (b) dated 03.04.2000 and confirmed by the third respoindent herein in his proceedings Na.Ka. No. A2/Appeal.30/2000 dated 06.06.2000 and further confirmed by the second respondent herein in his proceedings Rc. No. Estt.I(2)/3937/IG/2001 dated 14.05.2001 and quash the same, with all consequential monetary and service benefits and pass further orders.

For petitioner : Mr. G. Bala For respondents : Mrs. M.E. Rani Selvam, AGP

O R D E R

This Writ Petition was originally filed by the petitioner before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 3204 of 2003, challenging the order of reduction in time scale of pay for 3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

stages for 3 years with cumulative effect, which was subsequently transferred to this Court as W.P. No. 16702 of 2007.

2. Mr. G. Bala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that after the petitioner was imposed with the punishment of reduction in time scale of pay for 3 stages for 3 years with cumulative effect, he has preferred an appeal before the third respondent, the Deputy Inspector General of Police on 10.05.2000. Unsuccessfully, after the dismissal of the appeal he also filed an appeal before the second respondent, the Inspector General of Police on 04.05.2001 and that was also rejected. Subsequently, he has gone before the first respondent, Director General of Police on 09.07.2002 by way olf revision. But the revision, according to him, has not been disposed of. If the revision is not disposed of, it is open to him to pursue the same remedy.

3. As submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner, if the revision is not disposed of, the petitioner is at liberty to pursue the revision and on being approached the first respondent is directed to consider the same on merits.

4. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar avr To

1. The Director General of Police Chennai -4.

2. The Inspector General of Police Armed Police, Chennai-10.

3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Armed Police (M & W), Trichy -12.

4. The Commandant TSP XI Battalion, Rajapalayam.

W.P.NO.16702 OF 2007 (O.A. No. 3204 of 2003) RSI(CO) EU 2.02.15 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/