Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice ... vs The Deputy Inspector General Of ...

Madras High Court|18 September, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The relief sought for in this writ petition is for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the writ petitioner on 21.07.2015.
2. The writ petitioner was working as Inspector of Police and placed under suspension in proceedings of the year 2010. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner made a submission that the writ petitioner continues to be under suspension for about seven years right from the year 2010 and prolonged suspension is bad in law. Contrarily, the writ petitioner may be re-instated in service and posted in any one of the non-sensitive post. In this regard, he made a representation to the second respondent on 21.07.2015, which may be considered in accordance with law.
3. The learned Special Government Pleader made a submission that the writ petitioner has been charge sheeted and Disciplinary Action was initiated for the charges for forcibly and coercively obtaining about Rs.2.95 crores from the Directors of Pazzee Forex Trading Company, who are arrayed as accuseds in the criminal case, and the criminal case against the writ petitioner is also pending and therefore, it may not be necessary reasonable to consider the representation.
4. However, this Court is of the view that merits and de-merits shall be considered by the respondent and decision can be arrived, and the same can be communicated to the writ petitioner. Once, an appeal or representation is submitted by an aggrieved person, then, the normal expectation is to get a reply on the appeal or representation. Thus, the respondents are duty bound to provide information with regard to the decision taken by the department. This being the factum, this Court is of the view that the second respondent shall consider the representation of the petitioner, on the facts and circumstances of the case and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
18.09.2017 Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No dna S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.
dna To
1.The Deputy Inspector General of Police Coimbatore Range Coimbatore 641 018.
2.The Director General of Police Mylapore Chennai 600 004.
Tamil Nadu.
W.P.No.40421 of 2015 18.09.2017
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

The Hon'Ble Mr.Justice ... vs The Deputy Inspector General Of ...

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
18 September, 2017