Madras High Court
M.Senthil Kumar vs The Director General Of Police on 28 April, 2025
Author: Battu Devanand
Bench: Battu Devanand
W.P(MD)No.10933 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 23.04.2025
Pronounced on : 28.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
W.P.(MD)No.10933 of 2025
and WMP. (MD) No.8141 of 2025
M.Senthil Kumar ...Petitioner
Vs.
The Director General of Police,
Law and Order,
Kamarajar Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 4. ....Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, in the nature of a Writ of mandamus directing the
respondent to properly implement the G.O(Ms.)No.469 dated
03.11.2021 and G.O.(Ms.)No.421 dated 08.08.2022 to avail one day
off in a week compulsory for Sub-Inspectors and Head Constable or
police constable by considering the petitioner's representation dated
1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
W.P(MD)No.10933 of 2025
03.03.2024 and permit to take one day weekly off to petitioner in
accordance with law within the stipulated time period.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Sakthi Rao
For Respondents : Mr.Veera Kathiravan
Additional Advocate General
assisted by Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar
Additional Government Advocate
ORDER
Heard Mr.Sakthi Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by
Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the
respondents and carefully perused the materials available on record.
2. This writ petition is filed by a Head Constable working in
the Tamilnadu State Police Force seeking issuance of writ of mandamus
to direct the respondent to properly implement the Government Orders in
G.O(Ms.)No.469 dated 03.11.2021 and G.O.(Ms.)No.421 dated
08.08.2022 to avail one day compulsory weekly off by considering the
petitioner's representation dated 03.03.2024 and permit to take one day
weekly off by the petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated
time in the interest of justice.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
(i) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
police personnel discharged their duty round the clock on all days of the
week. It has been affecting them physically and mentally, since they
performed duty without any rest. They are suffering with a lot of stress
and strain, which some times lead to depression. Besides this, they are
not able to spend quality time with the family members. They are unable
to attend the family functions also. Due to this, some time, the general
public, who approached the police suffered a lot because of the rough
handling of the police. In order to take care of their health and to spend
time with their family members, compulsory weekly off is required.
(ii) Considering the difficulties being faced by the police
personnel, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of State of Tamil Nadu has made
an announcement in the floor of the Legislative Assembly on 13.09.2021
by granting weekly off to the police personnel upto the level of Head
Constable. Following the announcement of the Hon'ble Chief Minister in
the house, the State Government has issued orders in G.O.(Ms.)No. 469,
Home (Police-IX) Department 03.11.2021 for amendment to the Police
Standing Order 243 (1) The said amendment is extracted herein under:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
All Police personnel upto the rank of Head Constable
shall have five working days, for working on the sixth day in
case of existence for which extra time remuneration will be
given and on-day compulsory off in each calender week. The
schedule of weekly-off duty for the Police Personnel shall be
drawn in advance and pasted in the Notice Board of the Police
Station/Unit. This will be liable to alteration should it be found
later that a particular Head Constable or Police Constable is
required for a particular duty on his off-duty day. That Head
Constable or Police Constable will then be given the day off-
duty on the day preceding or following his allotted day and a
Head Constable or Police Constable due for off-duty on that day
will be inter-changed”
''If, in the Public Interest, any Head Constable or
Police Constable, is not given a day off-duty in any week, he
shall be granted Compensatory off on some other day''.
(iii) The said Government Orders and amendment to the Police
Standing Orders are communicated by the respondent to all concerned
officials for taking necessary action.
(iv) Thereafter, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu has
also made an announcement on 10.05.2022 to grant weekly off to the
Sub-Inspectors and Special Sub-Inspectors of police. Accordingly, the
State Government issued orders in G.O.(Ms.)No. 421, Home Police XI
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
Department dated 08.08.2022 sanctioning one day off for every 15 days
to the Sub-Inspectors and Special Sub-Inspectors of police and necessary
amendments are made to the Police Standing Orders 243(1) and 243(5).
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after issuing
specific instructions to all the concerned officers in the Police
Department in the State of Tamil Nadu, the said orders are not properly
implemented so far. It is his specific case that he was denied one day
weekly off many times. Due to the denial of weekly off, the petitioner has
suffered a lot.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that around
1,20,000 police personnel in the cadre of Constable and Head Constable
are working in the State of Tamil Nadu. Almost, all of them are facing
the same problem for denial of weekly off even after specific orders
issued by the State Government basing on the announcement of the
Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. In view of the same, requesting to
implement the orders issued by the State Government to grant weekly off
to the police personnel, including him, the petitioner submitted a
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
representation dated 03.03.2024 to the respondent. But the petitioner
could not get any information as to whether the said representation is
considered or not. Under these circumstances, seeking a direction to the
respondent for proper implementation of the Government Orders in
G.O(Ms.)No.469 dated 03.11.2021 and G.O.(Ms.)No.421 dated
08.08.2022, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court, by filing
this writ petition.
6. The issue involved in this writ petition relates not only to
one individual's health and quality of life, but also relates to thousands of
police personnel's health and quality of life. Considering the importance
of the issue involved in this writ petition, this Court sought response of
the respondent in writing for early disposal of this writ petition.
7. Accordingly, the respondent placed written instructions
through the Additional Government Pleader before this Court. In the said
written instructions, the respondent admitted the announcement made by
the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu on 13.09.2021 and 10.05.2022
and issuance of G.O(Ms.)No.469 dated 3.11.2021 and G.O.(Ms.)No.421
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
dated 8.8.2022 and making amendments to the Police Standing Orders
243(1) and 243(5).
8. It is further stated by the respondent that as on date, in all
Districts, Cities and Tamil Nadu Special Police Battalions weekly/
Fortnightly off as per eligibility is being given. The relevant paragraphs
in the said written instructions are extracted herein under :
''7. Thus, as on date in all districts, cities and Tamil Nadu
Special Police Battalions weekly/Fortnightly off as per eligibility is
being given. However, in case of exceptional circumstances like
major law and order bandobust, major temple/church festivals or
constitutional dignitaries visiting the area, et., where mobilisation
of large number of Police personnel is required the
weekly/fornightly off is withheld. All the supervising officers have
been instructed to ensure that compensatory off is given to such
persons on some other day.
8.Apart from the above facts, the petitioner is sanctioned
with weekly off periodically by following the G.O.(Ms.)No.469,
Home Police -IX Department, dated 03.11.2021. However, the
averments in the writ petition shows that the writ petition is being
filed for other Police Personnel and for their benefits. It is well
settled in service law that in service matters, writ petition cannot be
entertained as Public Interest Litigation.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
9) If any of the individual grievance of the department
brought to knowledge of the Superior Officers concerned, the same
will be redressed by following the above Government orders. In
fact, every week mostly on Tuesday the grievance of the police
personnel is being heard by the District Superintendent of Police
and Commissioner of Police in Cities. Therefore, the health and
quality of life of the Police Personnel is being taken care properly
by granting weekly off to the Police Personnel the work life balance
is also properly protected''.
9. In the written instructions of the respondent, it is contended
that the petitioner is sanctioned with weekly off periodically. But, to
establish the same, no particulars are furnished. As such, such vague
statement cannot be taken into consideration by this Court.
10. It is the contention of the learned Additional Advocate
General appearing for the respondent that the averments in the writ
petition would show that the petitioner filed the present writ petition
raising the grievances of other police personnel and for their benefits and
as such, the present writ petition has to be treated as a petition filed under
Public Interest Litigation. He further contends that it is well settled law
that a writ petition filed as Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
in service matters. To substantiate his contention, learned Additional
Advocate General has placed reliance on the following two judgments:
i)Dr.Duryodhan Sahu and others Vs. Jitendra Kumar
Mishra and others reported in (1998) 7 SCC 273; and
ii) An unreported judgment of a Division Bench of this Court
in WA(MD)Nos.307, 311 and 356 of 2022 dated 28.04.2022;
11. This Court carefully perused the said decisions relied on by
the learned Additional Advocate General. Though there is no dispute
with regard to the proposition of law in the said judgments, in our
considered view, the facts and circumstances in the present case are
entirely different from the decisions cited supra.
12. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that he is denied weekly off on several times contrary to the
Government Orders. While he is placing the difficulties being faced by
him for non-extending the benefit of weekly off by the concerned
authorities, he made attempt to demonstrate the said difficulties being
faced by all the police personnel working in the Tamil Nadu police force.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
Because of the reason that the petitioner brought the difficulties of the
police personnel being faced to the notice of this Court, it cannot be
construed that he filed this writ petition in the way of Public Interest
Litigation. In our view, while the petitioner is demonstrating his
problems before this Court, he brought to the notice of this Court about
the difficulties being faced by the other police personnel also.
13. This Court is very much conscious that in service issues,
Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable. It is brought to the notice
of the Court that admittedly, there is no Association for police personnel
working in the Tamil Nadu State to enable them to represent their
grievances to the State Government or to the concerned authorities. It is
also an admitted fact that in neighbouring States, the police personnel are
having their Associations. In such factual situation, the respondent
cannot expect that every police personnel has to approach this Court by
filing separate writ petition seeking to extend the benefit of weekly off
provided by the State Government by amending the Police Standing
Orders.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
14. At this juncture, it is worthwhile to look into the judgment
of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Govind Ram Purohi vs. Jagjiwan
Chandra reported in 1999 SCC (L&S) 788. While dealing with a
service matter, the Hon'ble Apex Court held in that judgment that there
was no point in waiting for each and every person to file a petition. The
relevant paragraph No.3 is extracted herein under:
“3. It was lastly contended by the learned counsel for the
appellants that whereas the petition had been filed by only
Respondent 1, the High Court while finally concluding the
matter has given a direction to promote all those who were
senior to the appellants even though they were not parties to the
petition. Once the High Court had placed a particular
interpretation on the Rules, the benefit of that interpretation had
to go to all those who qualified under the seniority-cum-merit
rule. There was no point in waiting for each and every person to
file a petition. Therefore, we do not see any reason why we
should entertain such a technical plea when the High Court has
done substantial justice to all concerned''
15. Under these circumstances, by filing this writ petition, to
bring the difficulties of the petitioner himself before this Court and at the
same time his attempt to bring the difficulties of all the police personnel
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
working in the State of Tamil Nadu to the notice of this Court cannot be
faulted.
16. This Court can't ignore the facts of an incident brought to
the notice of this Court by the petitioner that against one
Mr.C.Kalaiyarasan, working as Constable (737) in Uthagai Traffic Police
Station, Nilagiri District, disciplinary proceedings are initiated under
Rule 24 of the Tamilnadu Police Subordinate Staff Conduct Rules, 1964,
on the allegation that his wife on 18.11.2023 posted a text message in the
Uthagai Traffic Police Station Whatsapp group for not being given
weekly rest to her husband. Treating that the said message is posted to
defame the police, the said police constable was punished by an order
dated 21.05.2024 imposing the punishment of ''postponement of next
increment for a period of two years, which shall operate to postpone his
future increment and taken back for duty''. That instance itself proves
how the respondent and his subordinate officers are implementing the
Government Orders issued for compulsory weekly off to police personnel
and how they are honouring the announcement made by the Hon'ble
Chief Minister of the State.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
17. The aim and object behind the announcement of the
Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu to grant weekly off to the
Constable, Head Constable, Sub-Inspector Police and Special Sub-
Inspector of Police working in the State police force is to take care of the
health condition of them and it would be helpful for them to spend some
time with the family members to come out from work tension and stress.
Such decision of the Hon'ble Chief Minister is very much laudable. But,
in practical, the Government Orders issued basing on the announcement
of the Hon'ble Chief Minister are not being implemented effectively and
properly. Due to the inaction of the respondent in ensuring the proper and
effective implementation of the orders issued by the Government, the aim
and object for amending Police Standing Orders for weekly off is being
defeated and police personnel are not able to enjoy the fruits of the policy
decision of the State Government.
18. Admittedly, the petitioner in the present writ petition is not
seeking any relief against the orders issued by the State Government. He
only seeks effective and proper implementation of the orders issued by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
the State Government to extend the benefit of weekly off to the police
personnel.
19. Accordingly, in the considered opinion of this Court, the
request made by the petitioner in this writ petition is just and reasonable
and in accordance with law and as such, he is entitled for the relief
sought.
20. In the result, this writ petition is allowed.
21. In view of the reasons and findings summed up above, this
Court issues a Continuous Mandamus with the following directions to
render substantial Justice:
''The respondent is directed to implement the
Government Order in G.O.(Ms.)No. 469, Home (Police-IX)
Department 03.11.2021 and to ensure proper and effective
implementation of the said Government Order by concerned
officers”.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
22. It is absolutely made clear that in future, any violation of
the above direction would necessarily invite initiation of proceedings
against the officers concerned under the Contempt of Court Act, 1971
r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
28.04.2025
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
CM
To,
The Director General of Police,
Law and Order,
Kamarajar Salai,
Mylapore,
Chennai – 4.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
CM
28.04.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/04/2025 03:19:51 pm )
