K S VENKATARAMAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was functioning as a Superintendent of Police under the Tamil Nadu Government, when, on the 7th November, 1960 he was suspended from service with effect from the 20th October, 1960 because proceedings for departmental action were initiated against him on charges framed in May. 1958. The proceedings lingered on for about four years and ultimately, in the year 1964, the State Government recommended that ho be removed from service The Government of India, however, referred the matter to the Solicitor-General, who was of the opinion that the petitioner had not had a fear trial. Acting on that opinion, the Government of India passed an order that all the changes preferred against the petitioner be dropped and directed the State Government to reinstate him. On the 15th March, i9s5 the petitioner was served with an order from the State Government, dropping all the charges against him reinstating him in service and limiting his salary from service to the subsistence allowance drawn by him. Another order served on him on the same day directed his retirement from service with effect from the 15th of June, 1965 when he would attain the age of 55 years. On that very day, the petitioner was relieved of his duties and placed on leave. He challenged the order of his retirement in Writ Petitions Nos. 2402 and 2463 of 1965 which were accepted on the 8th of April, 1968 by this Court, which quashed that order. In the meantime, however, on the 5th of September, 1967 the State Government sanctioned the payment of salary and allowances at full rates to the petitioner for the entire period of his suspension.

(2.) THE judgment dated the 8th of 1968 in W. P. Nos. 2402 and 2463 of 1965 quashing the order retiring the petitioner was upheld in Writ Appeals Nos. 198 and 199 of 1968 decided on the 11th of February, 1971. During the pendency of the appeals, however, i. e. , on the 16th of July, 1968, the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on completing has 58th year.

(3.) IN response to numerous representations made by the petitioner thereafter, the Government of India sent to the State Government a letter dated the 29th of August, 1972, stating that the petitioner should also be considered for promotion to (he selection grade and to the super time-scale from the dates on which his immediate juniors were given such promotion and that such consideration should be on the same basis on which promotion was allowed to those juniors The State Government, however, refused to consider the petitioner's case for promotion and the Government of India decided nut to interfere with the decision arrived at by the State Government in that behalf.