Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D. HARIPARANTHAMAN, J.
E. Balu
Versus
The Deputy Inspector General of Police Villupuram & Another
Writ Petition Nos. 2703 & 2705 of 2009
Decided on : 03-09-2013
Police Constable - Service Benefits - G.O.Ms.No.15, Home Department dated 7.1.2010, G.O.Ms.No.937, Home Department dated 21.7.1998 - The court held that the petitioner is entitled to be upgraded as Head Constable with effect from 25.1.1998 and as Special Sub Inspector of Police on completion of 10 years of service as Head Constable. The court quashed the orders denying monetary benefits for the post of Head Constable and directed the respondents to pay the monetary benefits for both posts.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a police constable, faced suspension, conviction, dismissal, and subsequent reinstatement. He sought upgrades and monetary benefits, which were denied by the respondents.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was entitled to be upgraded as Head Constable from 25.1.1998 and as Special Sub Inspector of Police on completion of 10 years of service as Head Constable. The court also quashed the orders denying monetary benefits and directed the respondents to pay the monetary benefits for both posts.
Issues: The issues involved the entitlement of the petitioner to upgrades and monetary benefits based on his service history and disciplinary actions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's service history and the absence of pending disciplinary or criminal proceedings entitled him to the upgrades and monetary benefits sought.
Final Decision: The court quashed the orders denying the petitioner's entitlement to upgrades and monetary benefits, and directed the respondents to provide the benefits within a specified timeframe.
1. The petitioner was enlisted as Grade II Police Constable on 6.12.1975. He was upgraded as Grade I Police Constable on 7.8.1993.
2. While so, he was placed under suspension on 17.9.1998 in connection with registration of a criminal case in DCB Crime No.1 of 1996 relating to illegal arrest and detention of one S.Balaraman. The suspension was subsequently revoked on 6.2.2001. He joined duty on 19.2.2001.
3. However, he was convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vanur by judgment dated 21.8.2006 in C.C.No.52 of 1998. Based on the same, he was dismissed from service with effect from 6.10.2006 by proceedings of the second respondent dated 29.9.2006.
4. The petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.40 of 2006 before the Fast Track Court, Tindivanam as against the aforesaid conviction. The Criminal Appeal was allowed on 9.6.2007. The petitioner was taken back to service by an order dated 5.11.2007 and he joined duty on 12.11.2007.
5. The first respondent dropped the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioner in P.R.No86/99 on the same set of facts that led to filing of the criminal case.
6. The second respondent passed an order dated 20.5.2008, in the said circumstances, treating the entire period of suspension as duty period and he was paid all benefits for the period of his non-employment.
7. While so, the second respondent passed an order dated 30.5.2008 upgrading the petitioner as Head Constable with effect from 25.1.1998 on completion of 5 years of service as Grade I Police Constable. However, the monetary benefits payable on upgradation as Head Constable was denied. Hence, the petitioner filed W.P.No.2705/2009 to quash the order dated 30.5.2008 and for a consequential direction to pay monetary benefits.
8. The petitioner made a representation dated 28.7.2008 that his junior Mr.Mohamed Yusuf got promotion to the post of Sub Inspector of Police and hence he should also be given promotion as Sub Inspector of Police with all benefits.
9. He sought for upgradation as Special Sub Inspector of Police on completion of 10 years of service as Head Constable, with effect from 25.1.2008 pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.937, Home Department dated 21.7.1998 and also G.O.Ms.No.15, Home Department dated 7.1.2010.
10. His request was rejected by the second respondent by an order dated 25.11.2008 on the ground that he suffered the punishment of reduction in rank for two years from Grade I Police Constable to Grade II Police Constable in P.R.No.23/2000 under Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules by an order dated 19.2.2001 and hence, he did not serve for a period of 10 years as Head Constable for upgradation to the post of Special Sub Inspector of Police.
11. He preferred an appeal to the first respondent against the aforesaid order dated 25.11.2008. He wanted promotion from 2004 as Sub Inspector of Police as his junior Mohamed Yusuf was promoted as Sub Inspector of Police. He also stated that other juniors were promoted as Sub Inspector and he gave their names. In any event, according to him, he should have been given upgradation as Special Sub Inspector of Police on 25.1.2008 on completion of 10 years as Head Constable. The appeal was rejected by the first respondent by an order dated 26.12.2008.
12. The petitioner, in the circumstances, has filed the first Writ Petition No.2703 of 2009 to quash the aforesaid order dated 25.11.2008 of the second respondent and also the order dated 26.12.2008 of the first respondent, confirming the order of the second respondent. He sought for a direction to promote him as Sub Inspector of Police from 26.1.2000 with all benefits.
13. The respondents filed counter affidavit refuting the allegations. They reiterated that there is no illegality in the impugned order.
14. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he should have been promoted as Sub Inspector of Police from 4.8.2004, the date on which his junior one Mohamed Yus
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
