IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 03.12.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR A.Arokiya Nathan Wilson S/o.M.S.Anthony Swamy ... Petitioner vs.

1. The Director General of Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai-4.

2. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chenani Police Vepery, Chennai-7. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 2nd respondent in connection with the impugned orders passed by them in Rc.No.Estt.V(1)/165/20832/2010 dated 20.06.2017 and Rc.No.Estt V(1)/125/74293/2018, dated 20.08.2018 and quash the same and direct the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for inclusion of his name in the ‘C’ list of Head Constables fit for promotion as Reserve Sub-Inspector of Police for the year 1999-2000 and promote him with retrospective effect and grant hm all consequential service benefits. For Petitioner : No Appearance For Respondents : Mr.V.Nanmaran Additional Government Pleader *****

O R D E R

The petitioner challenges the endorsement dated 20.06.2017 issued by the second respondent whereby, his case for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (AR) for the year 1999-2000 and revision of seniority came to be dismissed.

2. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that out of

584 Head Constables who attended the written test, 340 Head Constables secured 25 marks and above and qualified for attending the drill test etc., The petitioner secured 31 marks out of 50 in the written test and attended the drill and viva voice test, in which he secured 21.2 marks out of 50. In total, he had secured 52.5 marks out of 100. As the petitioner had not reached the cut-off mark of 62.9, he was not qualified for inclusion of his name in the ‘C’ list of Head Constables (Armed Reserve) for promotion. It is further stated that out of 21.2 marks secured by the petitioner in the drill and viva voice tests, only one mark out of 10 marks has been secured towards rewards.

3. The order sheet reveals that there was no representation for the petitioner on 11.11.2025.

4. Today also, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the writ petitioner either in the physical Court or on videoconferencing platform.

5. In view of the above, the captioned Writ Petition is dismissed for default / non-prosecution. No costs.

03.12.2025 Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No Speaking / Non-speaking mk To

1. The Director General of Police Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai Mylapore, Chennai-4.

2. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chenani Police Vepery, Chennai-7.

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J., mk

03.12.2025