S. RAMACHANDRAN Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order, dtd. 26/8/2013, in and by which, the petitioner's request to fix his pay on par with his junior in the post of Superintendent of Police is rejected.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the filing of this Writ Petition are that the petitioner was originally appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police under the respondents with effect from 1/4/1970. He was thereafter promoted as Inspector of Police with effect from 1/4/1982. The petitioner's turn for further promotion as Deputy Superintendent of Police came in the panel 1994-1995. However, the petitioner's case was passed over on account of the Disciplinary Proceedings pending against him vide charge memo, dtd. 16/6/1995. However, the petitioner was promoted temporarily as Deputy Superintendent of Police with effect from 3/6/1997. Thereafter, in the year 2001-2002, the petitioner came within the zone of consideration for promotion as per seniority to the next higher post of Additional Superintendent of Police. Because the Disciplinary Proceedings were pending, again the petitioner was not considered.

(3.) On 15/9/2003, the petitioner was exonerated of the charges. Similarly the second set of proceedings ended in the petitioner being exonerated in the year 2009. The petitioner's immediate junior was promoted as Superintendent of Police by an order, dtd. 25/9/2004, the petitioner's services were not regularised both in the cadre of Deputy Superintendent of Police and in the Additional Superintendent of Police and as such, he was not granted any of the benefits pursuant to his exoneration in the Disciplinary Proceedings. The petitioner retired from service upon his superannuation with effect from 30/11/2004. Since the petitioner's services were not at all regularised as Deputy Superintendent of Police and further regular promotions to the post of Additional Superintendent of Police and Superintendent of Police were not granted to the petitioner, the petitioner approached the respondents. Since there was no positive response from the respondents, the petitioner filed W.P.No.35361 of 2004 and by an order, dtd. 21/8/2008, this Court directed the respondents to consider and pass orders.