M.Chinnadurai v. M/S. State Of Tamilnadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN M.Chinnadurai ... Petitioner Vs.
1.
M/s.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by its Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Villupuram Range, Villupuram.
4.
S.Selvakumar, Inspector of Police, SB CID, Avadi, Chennai.
... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking for an issuance of writ of mandamus, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to promote the petitioner as Inspector of Police retrospectively w.e.f. the date of his junior / 4th respondent herein was promoted during the panel year 2011-12 and consequently fix the pay from the date on which his junior /
4th respondent herein was promoted as Inspector of Police and pay the consequential benefits, by considering the representations of the petitioner dated 04.02.2019 and 26.09.2024.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Soundar Raj For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar Government Advocate
ORDER
By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.
The writ petition is filed to direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to promote the petitioner as Inspector of Police retrospectively w.e.f. the date of his junior / 4th respondent herein was promoted during the panel year 2011-12 and consequently fix the pay from the date on which his junior / 4th respondent herein was promoted as Inspector of Police and pay the consequential benefits, by considering the representations of the petitioner dated 04.02.2019 and 26.09.2024.
The case of the petitioner is that, the petitioner joined the respondent / Police Department on 22.05.2000 and when he was working as Sub Inspector of Police, he was imposed with the punishment of postponement of increment for two years without cumulative effect vide proceedings dated 30.11.2010. Aggrieved by which, the petitioner preferred an appeal. In the appeal, vide order dated 13.05.2011, the 3rd respondent has modified the punishment to that of "censure". The main grievance of the petitioner is that, without considering him, his junior / 4th respondent was considered for the promotional post. Hence he sent representations to the respondents dated 04.02.2019 and 26.09.2024 and the same were kept pending. Hence seeking a mandamus, the present writ petition has been filed. 4.
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, censure is not a punishment and therefore, the petitioner is entitled for promotion notwithstanding the punishment of censure. 5.
Learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would fairly submit that, the petitioner's representations will be considered on merits and in accordance with law within a reasonable time.
6.
Heard the learned Counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.
7.
In view of the fair submission made by the learned Government Advocate, without going into the merits of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to consider the petitioner's representations dated 04.02.2019 and 26.09.2024 and pass orders on it's own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
8.
In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the above direction. No costs.
30.07.2025 veda Index:Yes/No Speaking order/Non-speaking order
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
veda To 1.
The Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.
The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Villupuram Range, Villupuram.
W.P.No.27810 of 2025 30.07.2025