This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion as Sub Inspector of Police with effect from the date his junior Mr.R.Chandravelu was promoted as Sub-Inspector of Police with all consequential benefits such as seniority, etc.
2. Petitioner joined the services in the Police Department as Grade-II Police Constable on 15.1.1975 and was promoted as Grade-I Police Constable on 19.8.1994 and upgraded as Head Constable on 29.8.1994. Subsequently, the date of upgradation to the post of Head Constable was modified and the upgradation was given retrospective effect from 19.1.1994 instead of 29.8.1994. According to the petitioner after four years of service as Head Constable, he is entitled to the next higher post as Sub Inspector of Police. In the year 1998 the Range Selection Board considered several candidates for appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police. The case of the petitioner was not considered as the petitioner did not have the required four years continuous service as Head Constable. Petitioner has now filed the writ petition for a mandamus stating that similarly placed Head Constables filed Original Application No.4121 of 2001 etc., before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and obtained favourable orders on 13.10.2003 and they appeared in the Range Selection Board Test and were recruited as Sub Inspectors. Petitioner is also entitled to the same relief. Hence, the present writ petition is filed for a mandamus as above.
3. Counter-affidavit has been field by the respondents stating that the petitioner did not go before the Tribunal for any relief and he has not given any representation to consider his claim for promotion.
4. In the present case, the petitioner's plea is that his upgradation to the post of Head Constable was given effect from 19.1.1994 and therefore, on the date when the Range Selection Board Test was conducted, he was entitled to be considered. It is contended that the petitioner's case should be considered on par with his junior who was given the benefit of promotion. It is not in dispute that the petitioner in the meanwhile superannuated. Therefore, the question of getting any substantial relief by way of promotion to the post of Sub Inspector of Police does not arise except for certain benefits which he would be entitled to if he is given notional promotion.
5. In such view of the matter, this court is inclined to issue a direction to the respondents 1 and 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner for notional promotion on par with his junior on its own merits and in accordance with law. The petitioner is entitled to make representation in this regard within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents 1 and 3 shall consider and dispose the representation within a month thereafter. The Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs.
ts To
1.The Director General of Police, Chennai-600 004.
2.The Deputy Inspector of Police, Chengalpet Range, St. Thomas Mount, Chennai-600 016.
3.The Superintendent of Police, Kanchipuram District, Kanchipuram