IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 15.11.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN W.A.No.3633 of 2019 and C.M.P.No.23249 of 2019

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by Secretary to Government, Home Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009.

2. The Director General of Police, Kamarajar Road, Chennai - 600 004.

3. The Superintendent of Police, Nagapattinam District, Nagapattinam. ... Appellants -Vs-

K.Nagarajan S/o.Late Kaliyaperumal ... Respondent PRAYER : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the order dated 05.11.2013 made in W.P.No.13107 of 2013.

For Appellants : Mr.K.V.Sanjeev Kumar Special Government Pleader For Respondent : Mr.L.Chandrakumar

J U D G M E N T

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)

This writ appeal has been directed against the order passed by the writ Court dated 05.11.2013 made in W.P.No.13107 of 2013.

2. The respondent was working as a Sub-Inspector of Police and his next promotion avenue is Inspector of Police. However, there has been disciplinary proceedings against him which ended in a punishment which was awarded by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Thanjavur Range, Thanjavur, by his proceedings dated 10.09.2008, under which, a minor punishment of stoppage of increment for two years without cumulative effect was awarded against the respondent.

3. In this context, it is the case of the respondent / writ petitioner that the currency of punishment, i.e., for two years since starts from 10.09.2008 is over by 10.09.2010, therefore, from 11.09.2010, he would be eligible to be considered for all service benefits including the promotional avenue and as on

01.06.2011, which was the crucial date for the promotion to the post of Inspector of Police since the respondent / writ petitioner was eligible, he should have been considered for such promotion. However, since he was not considered for such promotion, he had approached this Court and filed the said writ petition questioning the order postponing the promotion to the writ petitioner beyond 13.07.2011, i.e., after 01.06.2011, crucial date. The said writ petition, having been heard, was allowed by the learned Judge through the impugned order.

4. Assailing the same, Mr.K.V.Sanjeev Kumar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants would contend that, as per the instruction to Rule 24 of the Fundamental Rules, if a Government servant avails leave during the period of punishment, the period of punishment shall be extended, during such extended period, if he again goes on leave, the increment shall be postponed further corresponding to the period of leave availed of by him, during the extended period of punishment.

5. By relying upon this instruction to Rule 24 of the Fundamental Rules, the learned Special Government Pleader would canvass the point that, insofar as the respondent / writ petitioner is concerned, though the order of punishment was made on 10.09.2008, his next increment due falls on 01.04.2009, therefore the two years punishment can be started only from 01.04.2009, it would be normally ended on 31.03.2011 whereas, in between, the respondent / writ petitioner availed totally 240 days leave on various counts, that leave period has to be deducted from the total punishment period and if that is deducted, the currency of punishment has to be extended up to 13.07.2011.

6. If that is extended up to 13.07.2011 before which the crucial date falls on 01.06.2011 for promotion for the year 2011, his name could not be included or considered on the said crucial date, i.e., 01.06.2011, therefore he is not entitled to get such promotion in the year 2011, since that has been extended or postponed till 13.07.2011, such action made by the appellant Department is in consonance with the Rules position and therefore, that cannot be tinkered with. The approach of the learned Single Judge in allowing the writ petition directing the ap