C SHENBAGAKUMAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a third party in this writ petition. He seeks for a direction to the second respondent namely, the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirunelveli Division, Tirunelveli to consider his representation, dated 07.12.2010 in the light of the G.O.Ms.No.368, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 18.10.1993 and pass further orders on his representation.

(2.) When the matter came up on 22.01.2011, notice of motion was granted. On notice from this Court, third respondent has filed a counter affidavit, dated 'nil January 2011. The representation referred to namely dated07.12.2010, a copy of which was found enclosed in PageNos.39 to 42, the petitioner described himself as Advocate Clerk residing at Kovilpatti and he also states that the third respondent in the name of vehicle checkup, had ill-treated and tortured him and made a false complaint. He had also made complaints to the State Human Rights Commission and other higher authorities.

(3.) The second respondent stated that only after completion of the court case any action can be initiated against the third respondent. But however, the petitioner wants to rely upon the G.O.Ms.No.368, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 18.10.1993 and Government Letter No.90586/94-2 PSAR, dated 17.05.1995and on the strength of the said Government order and Government letter, he seeks for cancellation of the promotion made in favour of the third respondent from the post of Sub Inspector of Police to Inspector of Police.