Ganesan .C v. The Director General Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date : 02/07/2024
CORAM
The Hon`ble Ms.Justice R.N.MANJULA Ganesan .C ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu,Mylapore,Chennai..
2. The Deputy Inspector General, Of Police, Madurai Range,Madurai.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District,Virudhunagar.
... Respondents PRAYER :-. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2nd and 3rd respondent to promote the petitioner as Special Sub Inspector of Police from 01.06.2024 on par with his batch mates by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 19.06.2024. For Petitioner : Mr.A.Balaji, For Respondent : MR.S.Shanmugavel Additional Government Pleader 1/5
ORDER
The writ petition has been filed for a mandamus to direct the 2nd and 3rd respondents to promote the petitioner as Special Sub Inspector of Police from 01.06.2024 on par with his batch mates by considering the representation of the petitioner dated 19.06.2024.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.
4. The petitioner, who is working as a Grade I Police Constable, has sent a representation to the respondents on 19.06.2024 requesting them to consider his promotion to the post of Special Sub Inspector of Police. Since the said representation was not considered, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.
5. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, submitted that in view 2/5
of the adverse report obtained against the petitioner, departmental action is initiated against him. However, he submitted that the petitioner's representation would be considered.
6. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondents to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. The failure on the part of the authority had prompted the petitioner to file this petition for seeking relief through issuance of Writ of Mandamus. As the petitioner has made out a case for invoking the extraordinary powers of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the respondents are required to be given with a direction to consider the representation of the petitioner within a specified time frame.
7. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the respondents herein to consider the petitioner's representation dated 19.06.2024 on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance 3/5
with law, after making due enquiry, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case or the claim of the petitioner and it is open to the respondents to consider the same on its own merits.
8. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.
02.07.2024 RR TO
1. The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu,Mylapore,Chennai..
2. The Deputy Inspector General, Of Police, Madurai Range,Madurai.
3. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District,Virudhunagar.
4/5
R.N.MANJULA,J RR
ORDER
IN WP(MD) No.14340 of 2024 Date : 02/07/2024 5/5