Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

K.Govindan, Vs the State of Tamilnadu — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Madras HC
2025
K.Govindan, Vs the State of TamilnaduK.Govindan, v. the State of Tamilnadu

Dismissed¶27

K.Govindan, v. the State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC9 Sept 2025WA(MD)/636/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Belated promotion claim by retired Tamil Nadu police officer; representation made 13 years after superannuation (28.02.2001) rejected on 11.01.2014; writ petition W.P.(MD)No.2391 of 2014 dismissed on 10.01.2018 for laches; writ appeal W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021 dismissed. Keywords: laches, delay, stagnation, promotion, Sub Inspector of Police, Grade II Police Constable, Tamil Nadu Home (Police) Department, Director General of Police, Deputy Inspector General of Police Technical Services, Madras High Court Madurai Bench, judgment dated 09.09.2025, Dr. Justice Anita Sumanth, Justice C. Kumarappan.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Court rightly rejected the petitioner's plea on the ground of laches, in light of the admitted sequence of dates and events (appointment in 1965, promotions in 1974 and 1983, superannuation on 28.02.2001, and a representation made 13 years after retirement).

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ appeal should be allowed and the Writ Court's order dated 10.01.2018 in W.P.(MD)No.2391 of 2014 (dismissing the belated claim for timely promotion on the ground of laches) set aside.

Court's answer

The Writ Court rightly rejected the petitioner's plea on the ground of laches, in light of the admitted sequence of dates and events (appointment in 1965, promotions in 1974 and 1983, superannuation on 28.02.2001, and a representation made 13 years after retirement).

Ratio / Principle

In view of the admitted sequence of dates and events, there is no ground for this Court to intervene; the writ appeal is dismissed with no costs.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Appeal (W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, decided 09.09.2025) dismissed. The appellant served as Grade II Police Constable (appointed 1965), Grade I Police Constable (promoted 1974) and Sub Inspector of Police (promoted 1983), and superannuated on 28.02.2001. Thirteen years after retirement he made a representation claiming he ought to have been promoted in time, having stagnated in the post of Sub Inspector for more than 17 years; the representation was rejected on 11.01.2014 considering the lapse of time. His writ petition (W.P.(MD)No.2391 of 2014) was dismissed on 10.01.2018 on the ground of laches. The Division Bench (Dr. Anita Sumanth, J., author; C. Kumarappan, J.) held that in view of the admitted sequence of dates and events there was no ground to intervene, upheld the Writ Court's rejection of the plea on laches, and dismissed the writ appeal with no costs.

A

W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 09.09.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021

K.Govindan

...Appellant

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home (Police) Department, Fort St.George, Secretariate, Chennai-9.

2.The Director General of Police,

Chennai-4.

3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Technical Services, Police Telecommunication Branch, Chennai-4.

...Respondents

PRAYER:- Writ Appeal is filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.2391 of 2014 dated 10.01.2018 on the file of this Court and allow the Writ Appeal.

1/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021

For Appellant : Mr.Mohammed Jamil for M/s.Ajmal Associates For Respondents : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja Additional Government Pleader

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.)

The writ petition is dismissed on the ground that the writ petitioner had retired in 2021 and made a representation 13 years later seeking promotion while he had been in service. The sequence of the dates and events reveals that the petitioner was appointed as a Grade II Police Constable in 1965, promoted as a Grade I Police Constable in 1974 and promoted as Sub Inspector of Police in 1983. He superannuated on 28.02.2001. After 13 years of retirement, he awoke to the position that he had stagnated in the post of Sub Inspector of Police for more than 17 years and hence, he made a representation to the effect he ought to have been promoted in time.

2/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021

The representation had been rejected on 11.01.2014

considering the the elapse of time which order came to be challenged in W.P(MD)No.2391 of 2014. By an order dated 10.01.2018, the Writ Court has rightly rejected the plea of the petitioner on the ground of laches. In view of the admitted sequence of dates and events, we see no ground to intervene, and dismiss this writ appeal. No costs.

[A.S.M.J.,] & [C.K.J.,] 09.09.2025

NCC :Yes/No Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes PJL

To 1.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home (Police) Department, Fort St.George, Secretariate, Chennai-9.

2.The Director General of Police,Chennai-4.

3.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Technical Services, Police Telecommunication Branch, Chennai-4.

3/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021

DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J. AND C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

PJL

Order made in

W.A.(MD)No.636 of 2021

Dated: 09.09.2025

4/4

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the writ appeal should be allowed and the Writ Court's order dated 10.01.2018 in W.P.(MD)No.2391 of 2014 (dismissing the belated claim for timely promotion on the ground of laches) set aside.medium confidence¶15
The court held
The Writ Court rightly rejected the petitioner's plea on the ground of laches, in light of the admitted sequence of dates and events (appointment in 1965, promotions in 1974 and 1983, superannuation on 28.02.2001, and a representation made 13 years after retirement).ratio¶27

Statutes considered

1 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Letters Patent ActClause XV¶15

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Order under challenge
Order dated 10.01.2018 in W.P.(MD)No.2391 of 2014 dismissing the writ petition on the ground of laches¶27
This Court (Madurai Bench of Madras High Court) · 10.01.2018
Prior proceeding
Petitioner appointed Grade II Police Constable in 1965, promoted Grade I Police Constable in 1974, promoted Sub Inspector of Police in 1983, and superannuated on 28.02.2001.¶22
Prior proceeding
Having stagnated in the post of Sub Inspector of Police for more than 17 years, the petitioner made a representation 13 years after retirement that he ought to have been promoted in time.¶22
Prior proceeding
The representation was rejected on 11.01.2014 considering the lapse of time; that rejection was challenged in W.P(MD)No.2391 of 2014.¶26

Parties & counsel

AI extract

appellant
K.Govindan¶7
Mr.Mohammed Jamil
respondent
The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Home (Police) Department, Fort St.George, Secretariate, Chennai-9¶10
Mr.D.Sadiq Raja
respondent
The Director General of Police, Chennai-4¶11
Mr.D.Sadiq Raja
respondent
The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Technical Services, Police Telecommunication Branch, Chennai-4¶13
Mr.D.Sadiq Raja

Coram

AI extract

DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTHauthor¶21
MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPANmember¶36

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Madras HC
Decided on: 9 Sept 2025 · September
Registered: 18 Mar 2021
Case no.: WA(MD)/636/2021
CNR: HCMD011181542018
Bench: Anita Sumanth C.kumarappan
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: W.A.(MD)

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Anita Sumanth C.kumarappan

Seaker B Vs The District Collector
4 Sept 2025
Balakrishnan Vs The District Collector
4 Sept 2025
J.Devaraj Vs The Executive Officer
4 Sept 2025
Karthigai Samy Vs The Secretary to Government
9 Sept 2025
S.Sahayaraj Vs The Secretary to Government
9 Sept 2025
Sri Vaisnavi Trust Vs The District Collector
9 Sept 2025

Cite this judgement

K.Govindan, v. the State of Tamilnadu, WA(MD)/636/2021 (MAD), decided on 9 September 2025.

The Madras High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Statutes1

Letters Patent ActClause XV

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Order dated 10.01.2018 in W.P.(MD)No.2391 of 2014 dismissing the writ petition on the ground of lachesThis Court (Madurai Bench of Madras High Court) · 10.01.2018
Petitioner appointed Grade II Police Constable in 1965, promoted Grade I Police Constable in 1974, promoted Sub Inspector of Police in 1983, and superannuated on 28.02.2001.
Having stagnated in the post of Sub Inspector of Police for more than 17 years, the petitioner made a representation 13 years after retirement that he ought to have been promoted in time.

View full history

Bench / Coram

DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH and MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

Parties & counsel