A.Karmegam, S/O.P.Alagappan, v. The Government Of Tamil Nadu,
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:06.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM 1.A.Karmegam(Rtd SSI) ..Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.1733/2019 2.M.Arumugam(Rtd SSI) ..Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.1771/2019 3.R.Kulandairaj(Rtd SI) ..Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.1772/2019 4.P.Murugan(Rtd SSI) ..Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.1773/2019 5.N.Nagapandi(Rtd SI) ..Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.1774/2019 Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary to Home Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Director General of Police, Kamarajar Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
.. Respondent 1&2 in W.Ps
3. The Superintendent of Police, Karur District.
.. 3rd Respondent in WP.1733 & 1771 of 2019 4.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District .. 3rd Respondent in WP.1772 & 1773 of 2019 5.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District .. 3rd Respondent in WP.1774 of 2019 COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd and 3rd respondents to revise and regularize the service seniority and give the notional promotion and revise the pension with monetary benefits equal to the post of inspector of Police Rank to the petitioner on the basis of the implementation order passed to the one D.Thangapandiyan SSI, S.Michel Antony SSI, R.Paul Durai SSI and their proceedings C.No.A1/12265/2013, R.O.O.No.141/2015 dated 27.03.2015 and on the basis of the petitioners representations dated 24.11.2018, 13.02.2018, 07.09.2018, 19.09.2018 and 27.09.2018 respectively.
1/3
For Petitioners in all W.Ps : Mr.A.Rajaram For Respondents in : Mr.A.K.Manikkam all W.Ps Additional Government Pleader COMMON ORDER The relief sought for in theses writ petitions is to direct the respondents 2 and 3 to revise and regularize the service seniority and give the notional promotion and revise the pension with monetary benefits.
2.Based on such notional promotion, a batch of writ petitions were filed with the similar claim for retrospective promotion and the learned counsel for the petitioners made a submission that against the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench, Special Leave Petition was filed and the matter is subjudiced before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
3.However, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents made a submission that during the pendency of the Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court decided the issue and delivered the judgment on 04.02.2022 as follows:
42.In view of the above discussion, we proceed to answer the second question that has been referred to this Full Bench hereunder:
"We hold that the Division Bench in V.Samy case did not lay down the law correctly and we uphold the law laid down in V.Ramachandran case to the extent that there is no deemed upgradation or deemed promotion contemplated in the relevant Government orders and the benefit of upgradation/promotion to the next level can be granted/claimed only on completion of the qualifying service in each level/rank as prescribed in the relevant Government Orders. At the risk of repetition, insofar as understanding the expression "retrospective operation" is concerned, we hold that The Government Orders operate prospectively but it imposes/grants new results in respect of a past event.
In other words, the Government Order operates forward but it looks backward and in that it attaches new consequences for the future to an event that took place before the Government Order was issued. If the Government Orders are understood in this perspective, there is no need to get into the issue of "retrospective operation. Thus, we are of the view that the Division Bench while rendering the judgment in V.Ramachandran case has dealt with the Government Orders in its proper perspective and the judgment in V.Samy case is hereby overruled." 4.As per the judgment of the full bench, the judgment in V.
case was held as the law not correctly lay down and the judgment in V.Ramachandran case, is upheld by the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court. However, it is contended that against V.Ramachandran case, Special Leave Petition was filed and the same is subjudiced before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
5.In view of the facts and circumstances, the judgment of the Full Bench upholds and as of now Special Leave Petition in V.Ramachandran case is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. If at all any orders are passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the said case, and if any benefit is granted, the petitioners are at liberty to approach the competent authorities for redressal of their grievances. However, as of now, the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court, dated 04.12.2022, is to be followed in all respects.
6.With the above observations, these Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-I) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) Ns To
1. The Secretary to Home Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2. The Director General of Police, Kamarajar Salai, Mylapore,Chennai-600 004.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Karur District. 4.The Superintendent of Police, Trichy District 5.The Superintendent of Police, Ramanathapuram District +1 CC to M/s.A. RAJARAM, Advocate ( SR-16958[F] dated 06/04/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.SPL.GP ( SR-17138 TO 17142[F] dated 07/04/2022 ) 06.04.2022 RD(26.04.2022) 3P 8C 3/3