SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 62220

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
C.PUGALENDI – Appellant
Versus
THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF POLICE – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 28.06.2024 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY W.P.No.17031 of 2024 and WMP.No.18774 of 2024 C. Pugalendi ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Additional Commissioner of Police Headquarters and Traffic Law and Order Avadi, Chennai

2. The Additional Commissioner of Police, Headquarters, Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai 600 007.

3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Estate Welfare & Community Policing, Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai 600 007. ...

Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records of the 2nd respondent's order in Na.Ka.No.Cut2/40217/2024 Se.Ka.No.1594/24 dated 14.06.2024 and quash the same.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Dhamodaran For Respondents : Mr.Stalin Abimanyu Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition is filed for issuance of a Certiorari calling for the records of the 2nd respondent's order in Na.Ka.No.Cut2/40217/2024 Se.Ka.No.1594/24 dated 14.06.2024 and quash the same.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 14.06.2024 directing him to vacate the quarters within 7 days from the receipt of the order. The petitioner has already filed an appeal as against his conviction by the POCSO Court. Even while granting suspension of sentence prima facie case has been found in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, the conviction will not sustain and even the dismissal order is unsustainable. The petitioner has been convicted only on the Court question without even the victim identifying the petitioner. The petitioner is suffering for no fault on him. Suddenly if he is asked to move out of the quarters he will be put to grave prejudice.

3. As on date the petitioner is dismissed from service. Therefore, he has no right to occupy the quarters. Even assuming for a moment that the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct, if only the petitioner is reinstated into service, thereafter only he can seek for quarters. Therefore, finding no merits in this matter, this writ petition stands dismissed.

No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

28.06.2024 Neutral Citation: Yes/No dpq D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

dpq

1. The Additional Commissioner of Police Headquarters and Traffic Law and Order Avadi, Chennai

2. The Additional Commissioner of Police, Headquarters, Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai 600 007.

3. The Assistant Commissioner of Police, Estate Welfare & Community Policing, Greater Chennai Police, Vepery, Chennai 600 007.

W.P.No.17031 of 2024 and WMP.No.18774 of 2024

28.06.2024

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top