A.Ambalkumar v. The Member Secretary

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 19.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN and C.M.P.(MD) Nos.20341 & 20342 of 2025 A.Ambalkumar ... Appellant -vs1.The Member Secretary Tamil Nadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus Pantheon Road Egmore, Chennai-600 008 2.J.Premkumar ... Respondents Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order, dated 04.11.2025, passed in W.P.(MD) No.24977 of 2025, on the file of this Court.

For Appellant :

Mr.S.Srikanth For Respondents :

Mr.S.P.Maharajan Special Government Pleader for R1

J U D G M E N T

[Judgment of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.] The appellant, who belongs to open category, has challenged the different cut off dates fixed for the qualifying age in the recruitment notification.

2. Referring to the recruitment notifications of previous years, learned counsel for the appellant contended that in all earlier recruitments, the cut-off date for determining eligibility fell within the year of the notification and not the preceding year. However, for the first time, the Recruitment Rules were modified to the disadvantage of the appellant by fixing the date for reckoning the required period of service as 01.07.2024, i.e., the year preceding the notification for selection.

3. The cause of grievance espoused by the learned counsel for the appellant is that for the recruitment of Sub Inspector, both direct and in-

service candidate, notification was published on 04.04.2025. If the cut off date was fixed as it was in the previous year notifications, then the appellant will be fully eligible to participate. However, by changing the Rule and prescribing that the requisite five years of service in the respective category should be reckoned as on 1st July of the year preceding the notification for selection, the appellant has been seriously prejudiced.

4. On the other hand, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent, would submit that the service rules had been amended vide G.O.Ms.No.168, Home (Police VI) Department, dated 02.03.2017, wherein the eligibility for appointment to the post of SubInspector of Police under the 20% in-service candidate quota was prescribed as 47 years of age and five years of completed service. For the purpose of reckoning the said period of service, 1st July of the year preceding the notification has been fixed as the cut-off date. Since the notification is dated 04.04.2025, the eligibility has to be reckoned with reference to 01.07.2024 and not 01.07.2025 as claimed by the learned counsel for the appellant.

5. This Court finds force in the submission made by the learned Special Government Pleader, since it is in consonance with G.O.Ms.No.168,

dated 02.03.2017. No doubt, the said amendment had not been followed during the previous year recruitments conducted during the year 2017 - 2024. However, that wrong cannot justify another wrong. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the order passed by the learned Single Judge has to be sustained.

6. Accordingly, the present writ appeal challenging the order of the learned Single is dismissed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. There shall be no order as to costs. [G.J., J.] [K.K.R.K., J.] 19.12.2025 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No krk To:

The Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board, Old Commissioner of Police Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008.

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.

AND K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

krk and C.M.P.(MD) Nos.20341 & 20342 of 19.12.2025