Madras High Court
The Government Of Tamil Nadu vs Tr.Y.Arockiyam Hc 868 (Retd.) on 26 February, 2021
Rev.Aplc (MD) Nos.18 & 19 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
Review Application (MD).Nos.18 and 19 of 2021
in
Writ Appeal (MD) Nos.337 and 338 of 2017
and
C.M.P.(MD) Nos.2476 & 2477 of 2021
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary to Home Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director General of Police,
Kamarajar Salai, Mylapore,
Chennai – 600 004.
3.The Superintendent o f Police,
Dindigul District, Dindigul. ... Review Petitioners in
both petitions
-vs-
Tr.Y.Arockiyam HC 868 (Retd.) ... Respondent
in Rev.Aplc(MD).No.18 of 2021
Tr.R.Paramasivam HC 384 (Retd.) ... Respondent
1/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
Rev.Aplc (MD) Nos.18 & 19 of 2021
in Rev.Aplc(MD).No.19 of 2021
Review Applications under Section 114 read with Order 47 Rules 1
& 2 of Code of Civil Procedure to review the common judgment dated
06.04.2017 made in W.A.(MD) Nos.337 and 338 of 2017.
For Applicants : Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss
Special Government Pleader
For Respondent : Mr.A.Rajaram
COMMON ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by T.S.Sivagnanam, J.)
The appellants in W.A.Nos.337 and 338 of 2017 are the review
petitioners in these review applications. The appellants seek for review of
the judgment and order dated 06.04.2017, which reads as follows:
“Heard Mr.V.Muruganantham, learned Additional
Government Pleader and Mr.A.Rajaram, learned counsel
appearing for the respondents. By consent, the Writ
Appeals are taken up for final disposal at the stage of
admission itself.
2.These Writ Appeals have been filed by the
Government challenging the order dated 26.11.2013
made in W.P.(MD).Nos.18310 and 18311 of 2013. The
said order is a common order in a batch of cases,
pertaining to promotion. The learned Single Judge, after
taking into consideration the Judgment of the Hon'ble
Division Bench in W.A.(MD).No.1506 of 2011, dated
2/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
Rev.Aplc (MD) Nos.18 & 19 of 2021
17.06.2013, allowed the Writ Petition. It is submitted by
the learned counsel for the respondents that the Special
Leave Petitions filed against the said Writ Appeal was
dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the
appellants have implemented the Judgment passed in the
Writ Appeal in respect of similarly placed persons.
3.Since the Writ Court had allowed the Writ
Petitions by following the Judgment passed by the
Hon'ble Division Bench, we find no reason to take a
different view in the present Writ Appeals. Accordingly,
the Writ Appeals are dismissed. No costs. Consequently,
connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.”
2.As could be seen from the above judgment, the Court had
followed an earlier decision of the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.No.1506
of 2011 dated 17.06.2013
3.We have heard Mr.K.P.Krishnadoss, learned Special Government
Pleader appearing for the applicants and Mr.A.Rajaram, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent. We have carefully perused the grounds raised
before us.
3/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
Rev.Aplc (MD) Nos.18 & 19 of 2021
4.We find that the review petitioners seek for finding fault with the
judgment in W.A.No.1506 of 2011 dated 17.06.2013 which they are not
entitled to because the Special Leave Petitions filed against the said
judgment before the Hon'ble Supreme Court have been dismissed and the
orders have been implemented. Therefore, we find that there are absolutely
no grounds made out by the petitioners to review the judgment and order
and the petitioners have miserably failed to point out any error which is
apparent on the face of the judgment dated 06.04.2017.
5.Further, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would
submit that in respect of similarly placed writ petitioners, the Government
has implemented and had paid all the benefits in G.O.Ms.No.326, dated
26.03.2015. The learned counsel has furnished the names of three of the
Special Sub Inspectors, who were also the writ petitioners and who have
been granted relief, namely, Mr.R.Thangapandian SSI 2207, Mr.S.Michael
Antony SSI 226 and Mr.R.Paul Durai SSI 359.
6.In any event, we being fully satisfied that no grounds have been
4/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
Rev.Aplc (MD) Nos.18 & 19 of 2021
made out to review our judgment, the review petitions are accordingly
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
(T.S.S., J.) (P.V., J.)
26.02.2021
cse
5/7
http://www.judis.nic.in
Rev.Aplc (MD) Nos.18 & 19 of 2021
T.S.Sivagnanam, J.
and
P.Velmurugan, J.
cse
Review Application (MD).Nos.18
and 19 of 2021
in
of 2017
and
C.M.P.(MD) Nos.2476 & 2477 of
http://www.judis.nic.in
Rev.Aplc (MD) Nos.18 & 19 of 2021
26.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
