S.Samayan v. The Director General Of Police
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 15.12.2025 CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI S.Samayan ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
2.The Inspector General of Police, Office of the Inspector General of Police, Race Course Colony, Madurai-625 002.
3.The Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law & Order), Madurai North, Thallakulam, Madurai District-625 002.
... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent herein to dispose of the petitioner's revision petition dated 21.11.2025 and settle the terminal benefits payable to him by reducing the quantum of punishment by considering his representation dated 21.11.2025.
1/7
For Petitioner : Mr.C.Gangai Amaran For Respondents : Mr.C.Venkatesh Kumar, Special Government Pleader.
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the first respondent herein to dispose of the petitioner's revision petition dated 21.11.2025 and settle the terminal benefits payable to him by reducing the quantum of punishment by considering his representation dated 21.11.2025.
2.The petitioner was appointed as Grade I Police Constable in the respondent Department in the year 1976. On certain allegations, he was dismissed from service on 12.07.1993. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed a writ petition before this Court in WP.No.3878 of 2004. When that writ petition was taken up for hearing on 08.12.2004, the petitioner has confined his relief to issue a direction to the Appellate Authority 2/7
to consider his appeal, dated 21.08.1993. Recording the submission made by the petitioner, that writ petition was disposed of with such directions, by order, dated 08.12.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed another writ petition in WP(MD) No.7776 of 2024, seeking notional reinstatement and service benefits, by considering his representation, dated 09.02.2024. Therefore, this Court, under the impression that this petitioner's representation dated 21.08.1993 has not been considered, by its order dated 28.03.2024, has directed the respondents to consider the subsequent representations of this petitioner dated 09.02.2024 and 14.02.2024. Pursuant to the orders of this Court, the representation of this petitioner was considered by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North Madurai City in C.No.D1(1)/E-7330596/2024, dated 26.06.
2024 that this petitioner's representation was already treated as an appeal and it was rejected by the Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police, Madurai City by his proceedings in C.No.D1(1)/220/36096/1998, dated 28.11.1998 and therefore, this petitioner's representation dated 09.02.
considered. However, the Deputy Commissioner, while rejecting the representation of this petitioner suggested that in the event, if this petitioner wants to adjudicate the issue again, he can prefer a revision petition before the Director General of Police/ Head of the Police Force, Tamil Nadu, Chennai. As per the proceedings, dated 26.06.2024, the petitioner said to have preferred a revision petition before the Director General of Police/the first respondent and filed this writ petition, seeking a direction to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on his revision petition. 3.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the available materials on record.
4.The petitioner was dismissed from service in the year 1993 and the appeal filed by the petitioner was also rejected, in the year 1998 itself. The petitioner is having revision remedy, however, the petitioner under the impression that his appeal is still pending, has approached this Court, in the earlier round of litigation. This 4/7
Court has also directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner. The petitioner's appeal was rejected as early as on 28.11.1998. Thereafter, the petitioner by filing a writ petition as if the appeal has not been rejected, has obtained some order at the admission stage itself and now, he filed this writ petition to issue a direction to the first respondent to dispose of this revision petition.
5.Considering the manner in which the revision petition has been filed after 32 years, this Court is not inclined to issue any time limit for the respondents to dispose of the revision petition. In the event, if the petitioner filed the revision petition dated 21.11.2025 in order, the same shall be considered by the first respondent and disposed of the same, on merits, within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 15.12.2025 gns 5/7
To 1.The Director General of Police, Office of the Director General of Police, Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-600 004.
2.The Inspector General of Police, Office of the Inspector General of Police, Race Course Colony, Madurai-625 002.
3.The Deputy Commissioner of Police (Law & Order), Madurai North, Thallakulam, Madurai District-625 002.
6/7
B.PUGALENDHI,J gns 15.12.2025 7/7