K.Arjun v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep By

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.06.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH W.P.(MD) No.16836 of 2025 K.Arjun : Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Chennai 600 004.

2. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep, by, the Superintendent of Police, District Police Office, Trichy District, Trichy.

3. The Commandant, TSP - I Battalion, Motor Transport Group Trichy.

: Respondents P RAYER:

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to revise the seniority of petitioner on par with his batchmates selected for the year 2012 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2025.

1/6

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Antony Arulraj For Respondent : Mr.K.Balasubramani Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

The writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to revise the petitioner's seniority to be on par with his batchmates selected in 2012, by considering his representation dated 24.03.2025.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3.The petitioner asserts that he joined the respondent department in 2017. His grievance is that, although he was selected in 2012, due to delay in his appointment caused by a criminal case registered against him (which ultimately ended in acquittal), he was 2/6

placed on par with the candidates of 2017. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 24.03.2025 to the respondents, requesting that his seniority may be revised to align with the 2012 candidates. As no action has been taken on the said representation, the petitioner has now filed the present writ petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, within a time frame that may be stipulated by this court.

5. 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 him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.

3/6

6. In the light of the above observations, there shall be a direction to the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 24.03.2025, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, as well as all other persons, who may be interested in the subject matter, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the merits of the matter and that it is open to the first respondent to consider the same on its own merits.

7. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 23.06.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PKN 4/6

To

1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep By, The Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, Chennai 600 004.

2. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep, by, the Superintendent of Police, District Police Office, Trichy District, Trichy.

3. The Commandant, TSP - I Battalion, Motor Transport Group Trichy.

5/6

VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.

PKN W.P.(MD) No.16836 of 2025 23.06.2025 6/6