THE STATE OF TAMILNADU Vs. E. SHANMUGAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents in W.P.(MD)No.l8058 of 2014 are the appellants. Aggrieved by the impugned final order dated 27.07.2015 passed in the said writ petition in and by which the appellants herein were directed to promote the respondent/ writ petitioner to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted subject to the condition that there is no legal impediment to do the same, the appellants have filed this Writ Appeal.

(2.) The facts leading to filing of the Writ Petition briefly narrated there as follows: The respondent/writ petitioner was recruited as the Sub-Inspector of Police (Law and Order) in the year 1987 and got his promotion as the Inspector of Police and at present serving as the Inspector of Police (Protection of Civil Rights), Ooty, Nilgiris District. It is the case of the respondent/writ petitioner that he was issued with a Charge Memo in P.R.No.l25/CBE/2009 by the Office of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Coimbatore, Coimbatore - 13 under Rule 3(b) of Tamilnadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 framing 8 charges and he was placed under suspension by the order dated 15.02.2010 with effect from 16.02.2010. 2.(ii) The first appellant herein has drawn the temporary panel for promotion of Inspector of Police(Law and Order) to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police vide Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.954, Home (Police-2) Department dated 06.11.2013. The name of the respondent/writ petitioner was not considered on the ground of pendency of the Departmental Proceedings and on account of pendency of charge memo in P.R.No.l25/CBE/2009 and also another charge memo dated 26.05.2010 in and by which, three charges were framed against him in connection with Paazee Forex Trading Company. The order of suspension passed against the petitioner was revoked on 10.11.2014. The petitioner made a challenge to the G.O.Ms.No.954, Home (Police-2) Department dated 06.11.2013 of the first appellant on the ground that the contents of the two charge memos are per se unsustainable, false and concocted and his legitimate rights for considering his name for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police was unjustly over looked. 2.(iii) The appellants/respondents in the said writ petition have filed a counter affidavit. The learned Judge on appraisal of facts also placed reliance on judgment rendered by the Honourable Supreme Court of India reported in 1995(2) SCC 570 in State of Punjab and others Vs. Chaman Lai Goyal and also the order dated 30.09.2013 made in W.P.(MD) No. 15690 of 2013 allowed the writ petition vide order dated 27.07.2015 with the direction directing the appellants herein to promote him to the post of the Deputy Superintendent of Police in the event of absence of any other legal impediments and also placed him above his immediate junior who was promoted to the said post. The respondents in the writ petition has filed the Writ Appeal have made challenge to the siad order.

(3.) Mr. A.K. Baskara Pandian, learned Special Government Pleader has drawn attention of this Court of the G.O. Ms. No.22 Personnel and Administrative Reforms(s) Department dated 24.02.2014 and would contend that as per the said Government Order, amendment to Rule 4(a) of the General Rules for the Tamil Needy State and Subordinate Services has been made and Schedule VI of Part-A deals with preparation of the approved list. As per para No.II, which deals with consideration of members for inclusion in the approved list, due to pendency of the departmental proceedings or criminal proceedings, the names shall be deferred and on exoneration or acquittal from the charges, a member of service shall be considered for promotion or appointment with retrospective effect from the date on which his immediate junior was promoted, if he is otherwise qualified for such promotion.