M RAMASAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges the order of the first respondent dated 10.08.2005 under which, the order passed by the fourth respondent postponing the increment of the petitioner for one year without cumulative effect as confirmed by the appellate authority viz., third respondent and the dismissal of the Review petition by the second respondent came to be confirmed.

(2.) THE facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are as follows:- THE petitioner joined the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service as Sub-Inspector of Police on 2.11.1979 and was promoted as Inspector of Police in the year 1993. While the petitioner was working as the Inspector of Police in Fairlands Police Station, Salem City, he was dealt with a charge under Rule 3(b) of Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline & Appeal) Rules in P.R.No.80 of 2002 for the following delinquency: Highly reprehensible conduct in having failed to take action against one brothel house runner S.Menon, residing at C.75, Vanchinathaiyar Street, Swarnapuri for his clandestine activities in running a brothel house with brothel ladies despite instructions to show improvement in policing in fair-lands P.S. jurisdiction by his superiors during August and September 2002.

(3.) THE petitioner had examined Defence witnesses and all would depose that they did not know directly that Menon was doing brothel business in his house and that no complaints were made by the persons who are residing in the said locality. THE complainant viz., Sukumaran, who lodged the complaint to P.W.5 regarding the running of brothel by Menon was examined as D.W.5 and he would depose that no such occurrence took place and he has not given any such complaint to P.W.5. After completion of the departmental enquiry the petitioner has submitted his explanation dated 07.01.2003 stating that the department has miserably failed to prove even a single incident.