LAWS(MAD)-2009-4-577

COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Vs. T DHASIAN

Decided On April 29, 2009
COMMISSIONER OF POLICE Appellant
V/S
T DHASIAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 13. 4. 2006 made in W. P. No. 25237 of 2005, allowing the writ petition with a direction to the respondents in the writ petition, who are the appellants herein, to consider the claim of the writ petitioner/ respondent herein for further promotion in accordance with law.

(2.) THE respondent, who was the original writ petitioner, joined service as Grade-II Police Constable on 14. 10. 1976 and was posted in Madras City Armed Reserve. He was promoted as Naik by the first appellant on 14. 5. 1980 and thereafter, he was further promoted as Grade I Police Constable on 4. 9. 1981 in the Armed Reserve. 2. 2. According to the writ petitioner one Suyambu, who was appointed during December, 1976, was transferred from Armed Reserve to Dog Squad in the year 1982, the year in which the petitioner was also transferred from Armed Reserve to City Traffic Police against his willingness. According to him, there are no norms for the purpose of transfers to various Departments, either Dog Squad or Traffic Department and there are no guidelines. 2. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said Suyambu was promoted as Grade I Police Constable and Head Constable on the same day, viz. , on 20. 6. 1984, however, the petitioner was promoted as Head Constable only on 1. 8. 1999. It is also the writ petitioner's case that on the basis of a representation made by one Mani, who was working as Grade II Police Constable during December, 1992, he was given double promotion as Grade I Police Constable and Head Constable with retrospective effect from 30. 12. 1985. According to the petitioner when he has passed all the necessary tests for the purpose of promotion to Grade I Police Constable in the Armed Reserve, he should have been promoted on par with his junior, Suyambu as Head Constable. 2. 4. On the petitioner making representation, by way of grievance, to the second appellant, the second appellant has passed the impugned order on 21. 4. 2003 rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner stating that the said Suyambu was posted in Dog Squad as a special case, since the same was a Specialized Unit and none was willing to serve in the said Dog Squad, and therefore, he was given promotion as Head Constable. It is also stated in the impugned order that no junior to the writ petitioner was promoted as Head Constable prior to 1. 8. 1999, by referring to the cases of his batch-mates. 2. 5. It is challenging the said order, the writ petitioner has approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal by filing O. A. No. 2775 of 2003, which was subsequently transferred to this Court as W. P. No. 25237 of 2005 and allowed by the learned Single Judge by order dated 13. 4. 2006. 2. 6. The learned Judge, having considered the submission made on behalf of the writ petitioner that while the petitioner was working as Grade I Police Constable in the Armed Reserve, to which post he was promoted on 4. 9. 1981, and when he was transferred to Traffic Department on 19. 5. 1983, he was transferred as Grade II Police Constable, whereas the said Suyambu, who was also working as Grade I Police Constable, has been transferred to Dog Squad and he was given further promotion as Head Constable, and having found that paragraph (5) of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the appellants was contrary to the records, and taking note of the fact that there has been suppression with regard to the promotion of the writ petitioner as Grade I Police Constable on 4. 9. 1981 and that further promotion given to a similarly situated person, viz. , Suyambu, has not been conferred on the petitioner, allowed the writ petition holding that there was arbitrary exercise of powers.

(3.) IT is clear, on fact, that while the petitioner was appointed in Armed Reserve on 14. 10. 1976 as Grade II Police Constable and promoted as Naik on 14. 5. 1980 and was also promoted as Grade I Police Constable on 4. 9. 1981, which fact is not in dispute, the writ petitioner was transferred to Traffic Department on 19. 5. 1983 and while he was transferred he was posted as a Grade II Police Constable. It is also not in dispute that while working in the Traffic Department as Grade II Police Constable, he was promoted as Grade I Police Constable on 1. 8. 1994 and was subsequently promoted as Head Constable on 1. 8. 1999. On the other hand, the said Suyambu, who was working as Grade II Police Constable in Armed Reserve on 1. 3. 1977 was promoted as Naik on 21. 6. 1981 and was subsequently drawn to Dog Squad and given promotion as Grade I Police Constable as well as Head Constable on 20. 6. 1984.