M KALIAPPAN Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HOME DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has sought for a writ of mandamus, directing the Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department, Madras, respondent herein, to include his name in the -C- list of Inspectors of Police fit for promotion to the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Category I, for the year 1994-95 with all consequential service and monetary benefits and for further orders.

(2.) FACTS of this case are as follows:The petitioner entered Police Department as Sub Inspector of Police in the year 1966, as a directly recruited candidate and thereafter, was promoted as Inspector of Police on 26.5.1980. He had a unblemished record of service and earned 250 rewards with 11 Meritorious certificates to his credit. Besides, he was also awarded Chief Minister-s Medal for his outstanding service in the year 1995. During 1994, when the petitioner was working as Inspector of Police, Thanjavur West Police Station, he was dealt with a charge in P.R.No.220 of 1993 under Rule 3(a) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, for gross neglect of duty in having failed to check up the weapons in the Police Station. Though the petitioner submitted a valid explanation that he had checked up the weapons available in the Police Station, he was awarded a punishment of postponement of increment for a period of one year with cumulative effect, by the Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur vide proceedings, dated 15.6.1994. On appeal, the DIG of police, by order dated 19.12.1994, modified the punishment as -deferred censure- for a period of three months. Subsequently, by letter dated 8.5.1995, the Superintendent of Police, Thanjavur, cancelled the punishment of -Deferred censure-.

(3.) ACCORDING to him, the date of issuing or publishing the panel of eligible candidates, is equally relevant for the purpose of assessment of merit of the concerned officer for promotion. To illustrate, if a government servant facing disciplinary proceedings or undergoing currency of punishment on the crucial date, fixed under the service rules, later on, is exonerated of the charges or if the penalty suffered by him on the crucial date is cancelled or set aside before the publication or issuance of the panel for promotion to higher post, then the government servant has to be included in the panel and promoted to the higher post. In substance, it is the contention of the learned senior counsel that if for any reason, the government servant is found not suitable on the crucial date fixed under the service rules, but subsequently qualified himself in all respects, then he has got a legal right to be included in the panel on the date when it was notified.