Elipe Dharma Rao, J.:-Both the petitioner and the fourth respondent are directly recruited officers belonging to Indian Police Service. On 8.1.2010, when the first respondent/State Government selected and appointed the petitioner as the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, the fourth respondent challenged the same before the 6th respondent/Tribunal by filing O.A.No.245 of 2010, on the grounds, inter alia, that he is senior to the petitioner; that the process of selection and appointment to the post of Director General of Police was not followed by constituting the screening committee as per Rules and the selection is not held as per the principles laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Prakash Singh And Others vs. Union Of India And Others [(2006) 8 SCC 1]; that his name was empanelled in the panel of Director General of Police by the Government of India by memo dated 21.5.2009 and inasmuch as he has unblemished record, there is no justification for the authorities to overlook him, merely because the pay rules were amended and himself and other senior most officers were given the same scale of pay.

2. Since the Tribunal has dismissed the said Original Application at the admission stage itself, on 8.3.2010, on the ground that the applicant/the fourth respondent has not established any arbitrariness, he has filed W.P.No.6917 of 2010 before this Court, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Madamus to set aside the said order of the Tribunal and direct the State of Tamil Nadu to follow the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in Prakash Singh's case and Note 2 of G.O.Ms.No.1403, dated 16.10.2008 and G.O.(D) 99, dated 30.1.2009 and select the Director General of Police of the State, Head of the Police force, from amongst the panel of three senior most Directors General of Police, as on 8.1.2010 and consider the claim of the fourth respondent herein for appointment to the said post.

3. A Division Bench of this Court, by a vivid order dated 8.10.2010, observing that the dictum laid down by the Honourable Apex Court in Prakash Singh's case has not been followed by the authorities, has disposed of the said writ petition with the following directions:

"(i) The first respondent is directed to forward the names of all the eligible officers in the rank of Director General of Police in the cadre of HAG+ scale of Rs.75000 – (and increment @ 3%) - Rs.80,000 as on date with all their service records to the 4th respondent Union Public Service Commission with necessary requisition for preparing a panel as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph 31(2) of Prakash Singh's case. The first respondent should ensure that the forwarding of the above particulars should reach the office of the 4th respondent Union Public Service Commission on or before 26.10.2010. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits or demerits of the parties to the writ petition.

(ii) If the 4th respondent needs any further clarifications or particulars as regards the names forwarded by the first respondent State, the same should be clarified as expeditiously as possible, if necessary, through a special messenger within 15 days thereafter i.e. on or before 12.11.2010.

(iii) The Union Public Service Commission should thereafter prepare a panel as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph 31(2) of Prakash Singh's case and forward the same to the first respondent State on or before 26.11.2010.

(iv) On such panel being forwarded to the first respondent State should make the selection from amongst the officers in the panel forwarded by the 4th respondent Union Public Service Commission and make the appointment positively on or before 7.12.2010.

(v) Till such time, the above process for appointment of the officer to the post of Director General of Police as Head of State Police is made, the 8th respondent shall be allowed to discharge the functions of the Director General of Police (Law and Order).

(vi) The fi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document