Madras High Court
Selvam vs The Director General Of Police on 25 August, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A(MD)No.2052 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.08.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN
W.A(MD)No.2052 of 2025
and
C.M.P(MD)Nos.11729 & 11730 of 2025
Selvam ... Appellant
Vs.
1.The Director General of Police,
State of Tamil Nadu, Chennai.
2.The Inspector General of Police,
Armed Police, Trichy.
3.The Commandant,
TSP, 1st Battalion,
Trichy. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of the Letters Patent Appeal, to
set aside the order dated 26.06.2025 passed in W.P(MD)No.17307 of 2025.
For Appellant : Mr.R.Suriya Narayanan
For R1 to R3 : Mr.T.Senthil Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:55:13 pm )
W.A(MD)No.2052 of 2025
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
The present intra court appeal has been instituted to assail the writ order
dated 26.6.2025 in W.P(MD)No.17307 of 2025.
2. The writ petitioner is the appellant before this Court. He was
appointed as Grade II Police Constable and the departmental disciplinary
proceedings were initiated under Rule 3(b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate
Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. An enquiry was conducted and based on
the report of the Enquiry Officer, penalty of removal from service was imposed by
the 3rd respondent Commandant, Tamil Nadu Special Police, First Battalion,
Trichy.
3. Challenging the removal order passed by the original disciplinary
authority, the writ petition came to be instituted. The writ Court considered the
issues and granted liberty to the appellant to approach the appellate authority,
namely, the Deputy Inspector General of Police and thereafter, Director General of
Police. Even, final revision may be filed before the Government under Rule 5 of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:55:13 pm )
the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Since
the efficacious alternate remedy is contemplated under the Service Rules, the writ
Court relegated the appellant to approach the competent appellate authority. Not
satisfied with the order, the present writ appeal came to be instituted.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant would mainly contend that the
order of removal is manifestly arbitrariness. It is vindictive in nature. The
punishment of removal is disproportionate to the gravity of the allegations framed
against the appellant. Therefore, the High Court may go into the merits and pass
an appropriate order. Thus, the writ order is to be assailed.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
respondents would oppose by stating that all the factual and legal grounds can be
raised before the appellate authority, who in turn is empowered to adjudicate the
same. That apart, a criminal case has been registered against the appellant and
charge sheet has been filed in the criminal case in Cr.No.201 of 2025, on the file
of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Bodi, Theni District. Since in the criminal case,
final report was filed and the departmental proceedings ended with an order of
penalty of removal, the writ Court has rightly relegated the appellant to approach
the appellate authority for redressal of his grievances.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:55:13 pm )
6. Pendency of the criminal case is not a bar for concluding the
departmental disciplinary proceedings. High standard of proof is required to
convict a person under criminal law. However, no such strict proof is required to
punish an employee under the disciplinary proceedings. Preponderance of
probabilities are sufficient to punish an employee under the Disciplinary Rules.
Mere pendency of a criminal case since not a bar, this Court do not find any
infirmity in respect of completion of the disciplinary proceedings in the present
case based on the records and evidences available. That being so, the appellant
ought to have preferred an appeal as advised to do so. However, this Court do not
find any infirmity in respect of the writ order impugned in the writ appeal.
7. In view of the above, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(S.M.S., J.) & (G.A.M., J.)
25.08.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
am
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:55:13 pm )
To
1.The Director General of Police,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector General of Police,
Armed Police,
Trichy.
3.The Commandant,
TSP, 1st Battalion,
Trichy.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:55:13 pm )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
am
25.08.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 28/08/2025 03:55:13 pm )
