Prabhakaran(Gr.I.P.C 26539) v. The Government Of Tamil Nadu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 05-06-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ REV.APPL.No.6 of 2024 Prabhakaran (Gr-I P.C 26539) ..Review Applicant -vs1. The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai- 600 009.

2. The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Chennai - 600004.

3. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai - 600007.

4. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Flower Bazar Street, Chennai - 600 001.

... Respondents Prayer: To review the Judgment made on 12.10.2023 in W.A.No.2545 of 2022 and CMP.No.20017 of 2022 in the light of the submissions above made and CMP.No.20017 of 2022 in the light of the submissions above made and set aside the judgment and to allow the prayer of the Review Applicant in W.P.No.18157 of 2020.

For Applicant:

Mr.M.Vijayan, For Mr.D.Saikumarran

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam J.) Learned counsel for the Review Applicant would rely on his submissions made before this Court during the course of his argument in Writ Appeal. In Paragraph No.10, he has raised a ground that order passed by Appellate Authority as well as Revisional Authority are cryptic in nature without assigning any reasons. There was no discussion as to how order passed by Appellate Authority is justifiable and proper. They, without application of mind to the charges levelled and deposition of witnesses and grounds raised, simply rejected the Appeal / Revision by passing orders, confirming the order of Disciplinary Authority.

2. A close reading of Writ Appeal order sought to be reviewed would show that in Paragraph No.16, the submission made on behalf of Review Applicant has been considered by this Court and findings made are that there are no convincing materials available, warranting interference with the punishment awarded to Review Applicant. Court held that Appellate Authority as well as Revisional Authority applied their mind to charges levelled against the Review

Applicant and came to a conclusion based on available records. Therefore, the said ground raised by Review Applicant would not constitute an error apparent on record, warranting exercise of review jurisdiction by this Court. Other grounds raised in the application relatable to merits cannot be adjudicated in view of the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, that review proceedings are not by way of an appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC; that Review is not to be confused with appellate powers, which may enable an appellate court to correct all manner of errors committed by the subordinate court; that in exercise of the jurisdiction under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC, it is not permissible for an erroneous decision to be reheard and corrected and that a review petition, it must be remembered, has a limited purpose and cannot be allowed to be an appeal in disguise.

3. In view of the above legal position in the context of the grounds raised in the present Review Application, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Review Application. Consequently, the Review Application stands dismissed. No costs.

(S.M.S.,J.) (M.S.Q.,J.) 05-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order AR

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.

AND MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ J.

AR To:

1. The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai- 600 009.

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

3. The Commissioner Of Police Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007.

4. The Deputy Commissioner of Police Flower Bazar Street, Chennai- 600001.

REV.APPL.No.6 of 2024 05-06-2026