Madras High Court
The Director General Of Police vs K.Perumalswamy on 23 June, 2023
W.A.(MD) No.883 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 23.06.2023
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJAY V. GANGAPURWALA,
CHIEF JUSTICE
and
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
W.A.(MD) No.883 of 2023
and CMP(MD) No.7059 of 2023
1.The Director General of Police,
Mylapore
Chennai 4
2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Training, Police Training College
Chennai 83 ... Appellants
-vs-
1.K.Perumalswamy
2.S.Santhanaraman ... Respondents
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order dated
06.09.2021 passed in WP(MD) No.10638 of 2016.
For Appellants : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Government Pleader
____________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.883 of 2023
For Respondent : M/s.Ajmal Associates for R1
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by
The Hon'ble The CHIEF JUSTICE]
The order passed by the learned Single Judge is assailed.
2.Original writ petitioner was appointed as a Junior Assistant on
27.04.1987 on compassionate ground. He has completed his probation
successfully and his services were regularized with effect from 27.04.1987.
Petitioner passed all the departmental examinations and became fully qualified to
the post of Assistant on the crucial date, viz., 15.03.1990 for the 1990-91 panel.
These are the undisputed facts.
3.On or about 06.05.2016, the order was passed by the department that the
petitioner had not reached the zone of consideration for the panel year 1990-91 to
1993-94. The third respondent in the writ petition was appointed on 04.05.1987
pursuant to the recruitment notification originally issued in 1983. The third
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.883 of 2023
respondent was promoted by including his name in the panel prepared for
1992-93. The original writ petitioner claimed that the third respondent junior to
the petitioner being promoted on 03.05.1993. The petitioner is entitled to get his
name included above the third respondent even in the promotion panel that was
given effect subsequently.
4. According to the learned Special Government Pleader, the third
respondent in the writ petition was appointed through the Tamil Nadu Public
Service Commission and the seniority list is to be drawn in the post of Assistant
in Tamil Nadu Ministerial Subordinate Service, Police Department, by placing the
Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission 1983 batch candidates above the persons,
who are appointed on compassionate ground by reckoning the date of service as
November 1983.
5. According to the learned Special Government Pleader, the learned Single
Judge has erred in passing the impugned order. We have heard the learned
counsel for the original writ petitioner.
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.883 of 2023
6. It is not disputed that the original writ petitioner was appointed prior in
point of time to respondent No.3. The seniority cannot be counted from the date
prior to the appointment of a person. A deemed date cannot be given for seniority
and for promotion, for the period the candidate was not born in the service.
7. As it was not disputed that the original writ petitioner also passed all the
departmental examinations and was appointed prior in point of time and the
seniority cannot be counted from the year 1983, though appointed in May, 1987,
the learned Judge has not committed any error, while passing the impugned order.
The appeal as such is dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs.
consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[S.V.G., CJ.] [R.S.M, J.]
23.06.2023
Index : Yes / No
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
RR
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD) No.883 of 2023
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.
RR
W.A.(MD)No.883 of 2023
23.06.2023
____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
