periodical punishments. By taking note of the past record of the deceased-writ petitioner, the second respondent refused to show any more leniency and imposed the punishment of dismissal from service, which was rightly confirmed by the first appellate. However, the learned single Judge, in exercise of his jurisdiction conferred under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, concluded that the punishment of dismissal is too harsh and excessive. According to the learned Special Government Pleader, as against the order passed by the Appellate Authority namely the first appellant, the deceased-writ petitioner ought to have preferred a Review to the Additional Director General of Police, Chennai. As against the order passed by the Reviewing Authority, a Mercy Petition ought to have been filed by the deceased-writ petitioner and a further Memorial Petition to the Government of Tamil Nadu. After exhausting all the statutory remedies, the deceased-writ petitioner ought to have approached this Court with the writ petition. Therefore, the learned Special Government Pleader would contend that the writ petition itself is not maintainable without exhausting the alternative remedies and therefore, she prayed for setting aside the order passed by the learned single Judge.
