Allowed

S.Daniel Fernando v. The Director General of Police

Madras HC21 Sept 2021WP/1104/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras quashed an order enhancing police officer punishment without considering the appeal. The court remitted the case to the Commissioner for a fresh decision on merits within eight weeks and disposed of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order enhancing punishment quashed; case remitted to 2nd respondent to pass fresh order within 8 weeks after considering appeal grounds.

S.Daniel Fernando Vs The Director General of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 21.09.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

W.P.No.1104 of 2020 and WMP.No.1321 of 2021 (Through Video Conferencing)

¶6

S.Daniel Fernando Son of T.Swaminathan Grade-I PC 36565 Office of The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Modern Control Room Greater Chennai Police Chennai – 7. ...Petitioner Vs

¶7

The Director General of Police, Chennai – 600 004.

¶8

The Commissioner, Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, Chennai – 7.

¶9

The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Modern Control Room Greater Chennai Police Chennai – 7. ..Respondents

¶10

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the 3^rd respondent passed order in impugned order in PR.No.94/GCP/2013/ (C.No.70/44920/PR IV (2)/2013) dated 17.04.2019 and conform by the 2^nd respondent in proceeding No.PR No.94/IV(2)/2013 dated 15.12.2019 and quash the same and consequently direct the 3^rd respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the panel drawn for promotion to the post of Head Constable and all consequential benefits.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Ganesan For Respondents : Mr. L.S.M. Hasan Fizal, Government Advocate

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The petitioner was working on other duty as a Driver attached to the Office of the Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court. It appears, without getting prior permission from the office of the 3^rd respondent, he got himself admitted in the hospital for a period between 24.04.2013 to 08.05.2013 for about 15 days.

¶15

Under these circumstances, the petitioner was placed under suspension and thereafter a punishment order was passed by the third respondent herein.

¶16

Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred the appeal. Meanwhile, the 2^nd respondent issued the show cause notice dated 08.08.2019 to show cause as to why the punishment imposed by the 3^rd respondent postponing next increment for a period of two years should not be enhanced under Rule 15(A)(1) of TNPSS (D & A) Rules 1955. The 2^nd respondent has now passed the order by upholding the order of the 3^rd respondent without considering the appeal filed by the petitioner.

¶17

As the orders have been passed without considering grounds of the appeal of the petitioner, the impugned order passed by the 2^nd respondent is quashed and the case is remitted back to the 2^nd respondent to pass a fresh appropriate order on merit after considering the grounds of appeal of the petitioner. This exercise may be carried out within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order.

¶18

This Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶19

s/d-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS-IV)

¶21

True Copy

¶22

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶23

drl To

¶24

The Director General of Police, Chennai – 600 004.

¶25

2.The Commissioner, Commissioner of Police, Greater Chennai Police, Chennai – 7.

¶26

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶27

3.The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Modern Control Room Greater Chennai Police Chennai – 7.

¶28

+1 CC to Mr.P.Ganesan, Advocate sr 48163. +1 CC to The Government Pleader sr 49036.

¶29

W.P.No.1104 of 2020 and WMP.No.1321 of 2020

¶30

JPII(CO) SP(28/10/2021)

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Daniel Fernando v. The Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Daniel Fernando v. The Director General of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Samundeeswaran Vs The Divisional Engineer

S.Suhasini Vs Chief Education Officer

N.Kesavan Vs The Joint Registrar

A.Vengatesan Vs The Member Secretary

S.Babu Vs The Chief Medical Officer

J.Umapathy Vs The District Collector