IMPORTANT POINT
The punishment of censure has no currency and cannot affect promotion eligibility if the misconduct occurred more than five years prior to the crucial date.

ORDER :

L.Victoria Gowri, J.

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, call for the records relating to the Order Na.Ka.No.F3/Tha.Pa.15/2007, dated 14.11.2007, passed by the 4th respondent Order Na.Ka.No.F.3/Me.Mu.12/2008 dated 22.04.2008, passed by the third respondent, order Rc.No. 101734/AP.I(2)/2008 dated 13.06.2008, passed by the 2nd respondent and G.O.(3D)No.69, Home (Pol.V) Department, dated 22.09.2008, passed by the 1st respondent and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner as Superintendent in the year 2008 - 2009 on par with her Junior - 5th respondent herein, duly placing the petitioner between P.Muthusamy (Sl.No.452) and R.S.Ravi (Sl.No.453) i.e. as Sl.No.452A and consequently to appoint the petitioner by recruitment “by recruit by transfer” as Personal Assistant (Administration) (re-designated as Administrative Officer) from 23.05.2017 on par with her Junior - 5th respondent herein, duly placing the petitioner between T.Ramsamy (Sl.No.35) and R.S.Ravi - 5th respondent (Sl.No.36) I.e., as Sl.No.35A in the panel of Superintendents fit for promotion by recruitment by transfer as Personal Assistant (Administration) for the year 2016-2017 approved in G.O.Ms.No.153, Home (Pol.V) Department, dated 27.02.2017, issued by the 1st respondent and grant all the service and monetary benefits within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

This Writ Petition has been filed to quash the order in Na.Ka.No.F3/Tha.Pa.15/2007, dated 14.11.2007, passed by the 4th respondent's, order in Na.Ka.No.F.3/Me.Mu.12/2008 dated 22.04.2008, passed by the third respondent and order in Rc.No.101734/AP.I(2)/2008 dated 13.06.2008, passed by the 2nd respondent and G.O.(3D)No.69, Home (Pol.V) Department, dated 22.09.2008, passed by the 1st respondent and consequently, direct the respondents 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner as Superintendent in the year 2008 - 2009 on par with her Junior - 5th respondent herein, duly placing the petitioner between P.Muthusamy (Sl.No.452) and R.S.Ravi (Sl.No.453) i.e. as Sl.No.452A and consequently, to appoint the petitioner by recruitment “by recruit by transfer” as Personal Assistant (Administration) (re-designated as Administrative Officer) from 23.05.2017 on par with her Junior - 5th respondent herein, duly placing the petitioner between T.Ramsamy (Sl.No.35) and R.S.Ravi - 5th respondent (Sl.No.36) I.e., as Sl.No.35A in the panel of Superintendents fit for promotion by recruitment by transfer as Personal Assistant (Administration) for the year 2016-2017 approved in G.O.Ms.No.153, Home (Pol.V) Department, dated 27.02.2017, issued by the 1st respondent and grant all the service and monetary benefits within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

2.The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Assistant on 06.12.1985, on compassionate ground. While she was working as a Assistant in J1 seat in District Police Office, Ramanathapuram, she was transferred to M1 seat on 02.12.1999 and files of M1 were handed over to her on 05.01.2000, including File no.M1/29413/99, which related to an accident of a Police vehicle bearing registration No.TN-65-G-0086, which happened on 30.08.1995, resulting in the death of escort duty Police Constable, namely, Karuppusamy. The legal heirs of the deceased police Constable have filed a Claim Petition in M.C.O.P.No.526 of 1997, before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Court), Tirunelveli, claiming compensation and the same was allowed on 05.07.1999, by an award of compensation of Rs.2,65,500/- with 12% interest from the date of filing of the petition and cost. As against the award of compensation, an Appeal was filed before this Court in C.M.P. (MD)No.2347 of 2005 in C.M.A.(MD)No.SR16515 of 2004. On 16.04.2004, this Court dismissed the Appeal, by an order dated 22.03.2005, on the ground that no satisfactory reason was disclosed for the abnormal dela