The delay is factual in all these cases. The petitioner joined the respondent police on 17.01.1986 as a Grade II Police Constable in the Kamuthu Special Reserve Police and subsequently promoted as Head Constable and now working in Abiramam Police Station, Ramanathapuram District. The petitioner deserted himself from duty four times and he was charged for desertion. Following is the tabular column showing the period of desertion, date of punishment and the mercy petition filed by the petitioner.
2. From the above, it is very clear that the petitioner, after suffering orders, almost after a period of five (5) years, preferred mercy petitions, without availing other statutory remedies, except in W.P No.30321/2013. When the punishments have reached finality, the same cannot be revived by filing belated mercy petitions for getting an order and the same cannot be challenged before this Court.
3. Though the rejection order passed in mercy petitions does not speak about delay, the facts would undoubtedly prove the latches on the part of the petitioner. Therefore, the petitions are liable to be dismissed. That apart, the police force is a disciplinary force and even absent of one member of the force would go against the public interest. So no leniency could be shown.
4. In the result, these writ petitions are dismissed. No costs.
23.03.2017 rgr
N.KIRUBAKARAN, J.
rgr
W.P Nos.30320 to 30323 of 2013
23.03.2017
http://www.judis.nic.in