Pushkaran Shaji, Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

Pushkaran Shaji, Vs Union of India — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to make a representation before the 2nd respondent seeking notional promotion on par with their juniors; representation to be made within four weeks of receipt of the order; 2nd respondent to consider it and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two months of submission; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the promotion of six persons junior to the petitioners to the post of Head Constable by relaxing mandatory qualifications, vide proceedings dated 14.05.2012 (Ref.No.X/P.OOO/11.C/Band/Rule 70/11), was illegal and arbitrary, and whether the petitioners are entitled to promotion/notional promotion on par with those juniors.

Court's answer

The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn, granting the petitioners liberty to make a representation before the 2nd respondent for seeking notional promotion on par with their juniors; the merits of the promotion dispute were not adjudicated.

Ratio / Principle

If such a representation is submitted, the 2nd respondent shall consider it and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within two months from the date of submission of the representation.

Key takeaways

Any representation by the petitioners shall be made within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Mummineni Sudheer Kumar, J., 08.08.2025): Writ petition under Article 226 challenging proceedings dated 26.11.2011 and the consequential Promotion Order Ref.No.X/P.OOO/11.C/Band/Rule 70/11 dated 14.05.2012, whereby six juniors were promoted to Head Constable (Band/RPF) by relaxing mandatory qualifications, and seeking promotion on par with juniors as under Notification Ref.X/P.608/HC/Band/Rule 70/11 dated 10.08.2011. On the petitioners' submission that 2 of 8 Head Constable vacancies remained unfilled and that they intended to seek notional promotion by representation, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to represent to the 2nd respondent (Chief Security Commissioner, RPF, Southern Railway); the representation was to be made within four weeks, and the 2nd respondent directed to consider it and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within two months. No costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

W.P.No.20343 of 2012

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 08.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

W.P.No.20343 of 2012 and

M.P.No. 1 of 2012

1.Pushkaran Shaji

2.S.Anandapadmanabhan

... Petitioners

Vs.

1.Union of India Ministry of Railways, Rep. by Director General, RPF Rail Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 001.

2.The Chief Security Commissioner, Office of the Railway Protection Force, Moor Market Complex, Southern Railway, Chennai – 600 003.

.... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2^nd respondent under proceedings dated 26.11.2011 and its consequential Promotion Order under Ref.No.X/P.OOO/11.C/Band/Rule 70/11 and dated 14.05.2012 and quash the same as illegal arbitrary and quash the same and consequently promote the petitioner to the post of Head

Page 1 of 4

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

W.P.No.20343 of 2012

Constables/Band/RPF/70/11 as under Notification

Ref.X/P.608/HC/Band/Rule 70/11 and dated 10.08.2011 on par with juniors. * Prayer amended as per order dated 30.01.2025 in WMP.No.2354 of 2025.

For Petitioners : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran for Mr.AR.M.Arunachalam

For Respondents : Mr.C.Samivel

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings dated

14.05.2012 whereby six persons who are claimed to be juniors to the petitioners were promoted to the post of Head Constable by relaxing mandatory qualifications.

Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that out of 8 vacancies available in the post of Head Constable, only 6 vacancies were filled up and still there are 2 vacancies and the petitioners intend to make a representation to the respondents seeking for consideration of their cases, as they were fully qualified to hold the post of Head Constable for notional promotion on par with the juniors who are the beneficiaries of the proceedings No.X/P.OOO/11.C/Band/Rule 70/11 dated 14.05.2012.

Page 2 of 4

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

W.P.No.20343 of 2012

In the light of the above, the writ petition is dismissed as

withdrawn granting liberty to the petitioners to make a representation before the 2^nd respondent for seeking notional promotion on par with their juniors. In case, if any such representation is submitted, the 2^nd respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law within a period of two (2) months from the date of submission of representation. The representation, if any, shall be made by the petitioners within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as with drawn. No

costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

08.08.2025

dpa

Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No

Page 3 of 4

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

W.P.No.20343 of 2012

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J. dpa

To

1.The Director General, RPF Union of India Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhavan, New Delhi – 110 001.

2.The Chief Security Commissioner, Office of the Railway Protection Force, Moor Market Complex, Southern Railway, Chennai – 600 003.

W.P.No.20343 of 2012

08.08.2025

Page 4 of 4

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