Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
S. Subramanian – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by Secretary to Government, Home (Police II) Department, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint the petitioner in the post of Sub Inspector of Police based on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No.21828 of 2006 etc., in Civil Appeal No.7667 of 2014 etc., dated 07.08.2014 with all consequential service and monetary benefits in the interest of justice within the time frame fixed by this Court.)
1. This writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint the petitioner in the post of Sub Inspector of Police based on the decision of the Honourable Supreme Court in S.L.P.No.21828 of 2006 etc., in Civil Appeal No.7667 of 2014 etc., dated 07.08.2014 with all consequential service and monetary benefits in the interest of justice, within the time frame fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner states that his is working as Head Constable in Tamil Nadu Police Department. The Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board invited applications from the eligible candidates for appoint to the post of Sub Inspector of Police Category-I under 20% quota from departmental candidates. The petitioner submitted his
Delay in filing a writ petition after 22 years can bar the petitioner from relief, especially when the issues have been settled by the Supreme Court.
The principle of delay and latches in approaching the court for relief, and the impact of settled issues by the Honourable Supreme Court on subsequent petitions.
Delay and laches can bar a writ petition, and nonjoinder of necessary and proper parties can render a petition not maintainable.
Writ petitions are subject to implicit limitations; unreasonable delays can bar claims regardless of merit, and necessary parties must be included for maintainability.
The decision highlights the importance of character and antecedent verification for uniformed services, the finality of the Selection Committee's decision, and the inability to claim retrospective se....
The period of continuous officiation after appointment has to be taken into account for determining seniority, and where an appointment was made by way of a stopgap arrangement, the experience on suc....
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
