P SUGUMARAN Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. V.Rajasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader, takes notice on behalf of the respondents. By consent of both sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The writ petition on the face of it is misconceived. The writ petitioner, admittedly was promoted as Head Constable from the post of Grade-II Police Constable only on 30.08.2000. His grievance in the writ petition is that in the panel of Head Constables eligible to be promoted as Special Sub Inspector of Police shown in the "C" list dated 01.03.2010, issued by the 3rd respondent Superintendent of Police, his name did not find a place. His challenge is that his juniors viz., C.Selvaraj, R.Christudhas, G.Chanderasekaran, P.Ramachandran and M.Vijayan have been included in the "C" list of Special Sub Inspectors and therefore, the non inclusion of the petitioner in the "C" List is improper.

(3.) On the other hand, a reference to "C" list of Head Constables eligible to the promotion of the Special Sub Inspector of Police shows that the said C.Selvaraj, R.Christudhas, G.Chandrasekaran, P.Ramachandran and M.Vijayan were promoted as early as on 22.07.2009, while the petitioner was promoted as Head Constable only on 30.08.2000. Therefore, there is absolutely no comparison of the petitioner with that of the above stated Head Constables, who are stated to be juniors to the petitioners. Further, the "C" list also shows that the last person finds place in the "C" List of Head Constables eligible for promotion as Special Sub Inspector of Police viz., K.Padmanaba Dhas, Serial No.184 was promoted as a Head Constable on 11.01.2000. On the face of it, the claim of the petitioner is not sustainable for the simple reason that the last person in the "C" List was promoted on 11.01.2000, while the petitioner was promoted as Head Constable on 30.08.2000. Therefore, he can never claim to include his name in the "C" List.