IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.08.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.No.17579 of 2009 P.Jeevanandham ...Petitioner Vs. 1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The Director General of Police, Chennai - 600 004. 3.The Inspector General of Police, Intelligence, Chennai - 600 004. 4.The Superintendent of Police, 'Q' Branch, C.I.D., Chennai - 600 004. ...Respondents Writ Petition is preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of Certiorarified mandamus, call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in R.C.No.231678/CB II(1)/2007 dt.21.8.2008 and to quash the same and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd respondents to grant one time accelerated promotion and other benefits to the petitioner as granted to the contemporary Special Task Force personnels in G.O.Ms.No.1346 Home (Pol.V) Department dt.6.12.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.468 Home (Pol.2) Department dt.19.3.1996, Government of Tamilnadu. For Petitioner : Mr.ARL.Sundaresan, Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Ravichandran For Respondents : Mr.V.Subbiah, Spl.G.P. O R D E R The petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition, challenging an order of the second respondent dated 21.08.2008 and after setting aside the same seeks for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to grant one time accelerated promotion and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ other benefits to the petitioner as granted to other contemporary Special Task Force personnels in G.O.Ms.No.1346 Home (Pol.V) Department dated 06.12.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.468 Home (Pol.2) Department dated 19.3.1996 and to pass appropriate orders. 2. Notice of motion was ordered in the writ petition on 28.08.2009. Subsequently, the matter was admitted on 12.03.2010. On notice from this Court, the first respondent Government has filed a counter affidavit dated 31.03.2010. 3. Heard the arguments of Mr.ARL.Sundaresan, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Mr.M.Ravichandran, counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 4 (1). The case of the petitioner was that he was an Head Constable serving in 'Q' Branch, CID Police at Thanjavur Unit. He joined as Police Constable in the year 1994 and he has worked for more than 16 years. While he was serving in the 3rd and 4th respondents' office, he was engaged in a Team headed by one Deputy Superintendent of Police by name S.Rajendran to combat the extremist groups which was functioning under the name and style of "Tamilar Meetchi Padai" (Tamil Retrieval Force). That group had links with the forest brigand and sandal wood smuggler Veerappan, thereby caused endanger to the security of the State of Tamil Nadu and sovereignty of India. The petitioner's team headed by the then Inspector of Police/Deputy Superintendent of Police Rajendran consisted of two Sub Inspectors, three Head Constables including the petitioner and one Police Constable. They captured the extremists on 18.11.1999 and arrested one Muthukumar, the leader of Tamil Nadu Retrieval Group (TNRT) and his associates Sathyamoorthy, Manikandan and one Muruganandam who belonged to 'Tamilar Pasarai'. They also recovered revolver, pistols and bullets, which was looted by them along with sandal wood smuggler Veerappan on 20.12.1998 at Vellithiruppur Police Station. At the time of their operation, the accused fired at the petitioner's team and to the great risk of their personal life, they were able to arrest them. A case was registered against them in Thanjavur 'Q' Branch CID Department in Crime No.2 of 1999 for offences under the Arms Act. The accused were remanded to custody and thereafter, the files were transferred to the District Crime Branch, Erode at the instance of the second respondent Director General of Police. 4(2). In continuation of the above operation, their Team had also arrested one Muruganandam, the leader of Terrorist Group by name 'Tamilar Pasarai' and seized explosive substances from him. Another case was registered in Crime No.3 of 1999 for offences under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. Subsequent to the investigation, a charge sheet was filed in S.C.No.101 of 2000 and the Sessions Court at Thanjavur convicted the accused. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4(3). Their team also engaged in the capture of an accused one Selvam @ Raju on 07.02.2001 and on his confession they rushed to Banglow Pudur Jungle where large amount of fire arms were seized and a case was also registered. 4(4) The very same team also dealt with the investigation of the abduction of Kannada Actor Dr.Rajkumar in Crime No.90 of 2000 on the file of the Thalavadi Police Station. They had also dealt with the case of attack of Kullanchavadi Police Station in Cuddalore District and Andimadam Police Station in Perambalur District. They had arrested Ravi @ Vazhuthalampattu Ravi, Alappakkam Murugesan, Nallarasu, Peter, Radio Venkatesan and other extremists in Tamil Nadu. 5. It was submitted that Thanjavur 'Q' Branch CID Team Personnel's were granted meritorious service entry and money rewards by the third respondent Inspector General of Police, Intelligence. They were also granted meritorious service entry and money rewards for their excellent works done. They served in the jungle area to nab the forest brigand Veerappan. The team leader S.Rajendran, then Inspector of Police was awarded with Tamil Nadu Chief Minister's Medal in the year 1988 and Tamil Nadu Chief Minister's Police Medal on the eve of Independence Day 2002. 6. It was stated that the first respondent State Government passed an order in G.O.(Ms)No.1252 dated 29.10.2004 granting accelerated promotion to the Special Task Force (STF) which was responsible for encounter and killing of notorious Forest Brigand Veerappan. In the Government order dated 29.10.2004, it was stated as follows:- "In a daring and intrepid operation, the Special Task Force headed by Thiru K.Vijay Kumar, I.P.S., Additional Director General of Police, has shot dead the Forest Brigand, Bandit, murderer and dacoit Veerappan along with his three gang members on 18.10.2004. This sterling achievement is the result of sustained efforts of Special Task Force Officers and men who have indeed sacrificed their safety and the comfort of their home, spending years away from their families and leading dangerous life in the thick forest, braving hardship, sickness and threat to their precious lives. 2. In recognition of their courage and heroic achievement, the Hon'ble Chief Minister in the Press Meet held on 19.10.2004 has announced among others that "one stage accelerated promotion" will be given to all the 752 Special Task Force, Personnel involved in the operation." Apart from specifying the total number of persons as 752, classification of the rank of various Police Force was also given in Paragraph 5. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. Subsequently, G.O.Ms.No.1346 Home (Police VIII) Department, dated 06.12.2004 was issued in respect of another group of 163 persons who had earlier served in the Special Task Force and made outstanding performance. In paragraph 3 of the Government Order, it was stated as follows:- "3. The Government have now reviewed the above issue further and decided to recognize the service of those police personnel who displayed exemplary courage risking their life against the Forest Brigand Veerappan and his gang. In pursuance of the above, the Director General of Police has proposed for granting of one stage accelerated promotion to another batch of 163 (one hundred and sixty three only) police personnel who had earlier served in the Special Task Force and performed outstandingly in manor operations and encounters during the period 1993-94 and the police personnel who were members of the Jungle Patrol Party (Precursor to the Special Task Force) who had participated in major operations and encounters cases from the year 1990-93 which ultimately ended in the killing of Veerappan and his gang." The number of persons and their rank were also set out in paragraph 5. 8. It was claimed by the petitioner that the Government has constituted a Board and has prescribed guidelines for grant of accelerated promotion to Police Persons vide G.O.Ms.No.468 dated 19.03.1996. Under the said guidelines, the Board will comprise of Secretaries to the Government for the Departments of Home, Public, Personnel and Administrative Reforms, the Director General of Police and the Inspector General of Police as its Members. A Deputy Secretary or Joint Secretary or Special Secretary to the Government for Home Department will act as the Secretary of the Board. They will examine the matters for awarding accelerated promotion to the Police persons on the basis of the Performance of High Order and Exceptional Personal ability in achieving operational success at great risk to personal life and Professional competency of a very high order in detecting sensational murder, dacoity, robbery and other such cases having ramification in other parts of the country and its successful prosecution. 9. It is the case of the petitioner that the 4th respondent sent a representation dated 22.04.2008 recommending the case of S.Rajendran, Dy. Supdt. Of Police to consider him for the grant of promotion on par with the STF staff who were awarded Medal, Cash reward promotion and house site. By an order dated 21.08.2008, the second respondent rejected the said request. However, subsequently, S.Rajendran, Dy. Supdt. Of Police once again made a request to the 4th respondent to grant the entire team including the petitioner for the accelerated promotion as announced to the STF. The fourth respondent forwarded the said letter to the second respondent. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Thereafter, they also sent further representation to the second respondent. Since there was no reply, they have come forward to challenge the communication sent by the second respondent dated 21.08.2008. By the said order, the second respondent informed that S.Rajendran, who was heading the team including the petitioner was not directly involved in the operation to capture Veerappan and therefore, they were not eligible for the same relief. 10. The contention raised by the petitioner was that even persons who were not directly involved were granted incentives in terms of G.O.Ms.No.1346 dated 06.12.2004 and that the question whether such a relief can be given for outstanding performance can be decided only by the Committee headed by the Home Secretary and comprising of other Secretaries to Government and the Board which is authorised to perform the said duty. The second respondent is only a member and therefore, he cannot forestall their claim being considered by the said Committee. 11. on notice, the first respondent State filed a counter. It was stated that the petitioner was given cash awards for the work done by him. The arrest of Selvam was only in the discharge of his official duty and he did not play any direct role in the arrest of Veerappan or in the release of the abducted cine actor Rajkumar. With reference to the attack on the Kullanchavadi Police Station, he had only assisted the Investigating Police Officer and it was part and parcel of his official duty. Suitable Cash awards were given for the work done by the petitioner and their claim was rejected through the orders of the second respondent. 12. In the counter affidavit, in paragraphs 7 and 8 it was averred as follows: "7. It is submitted that the Government issued orders in G.O.(Ms)No.1252, dated 29.10.2004 and G.O. (Ms)No.1346, dated 06.12.2004, in which, instructions were issued, regarding the selection of police personnel for the award and other benefits to be granted related to the elimination of Veerappan. Based on that guidelines and as per the available records, the representation of the petitioner was considered and found that the role played by the team led by Thiru S.Rajendran, then Inspector of Police, 'Q' Branch C.I.D, Thanjavur Unit was not directly involved in the elimination of Veerappan. Hence the representation of the petitioner was rejected and the petitioner was also informed through the Director General of Police vide his C.O.Memo Rc.No.231678/GB II(1)/07 dated 21.08.08 communicated in C.No.A1/Q/9329/08 dated 31.10.08. 8. It is submitted that the 'Q' Branch C.I.D was established to watch and collect intelligence and to take appropriate follow up action against the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ individuals/Members of Tamil Chauvinists, L.T.T.E, Srilankan Tamils and left wing organisations, who indulged in activities which are likely to affect the general Law and Order situation of the state and affect the relationship with the neighbouring states and countries. The petitioner is also one of the member of the 'Q' Branch C.I.D and he assisted his superior that is Thiru S.Rajendran, then Inspector of Police, 'Q' Branch C.I.D, Thanjavur Unit. Moreover he is bound to do such kind of legal duties as instructed by his superiors." 13. Though Mr.ARL.Sundaresan, learned Senior Counsel contended that even the counter affidavit will not satisfy his client since the matter was never placed before the Board. This Court is unable to accept the said contention. What is sought for in the present writ petition is for a direction to the State to exercise its discretion to grant relief to the petitioner. Both the Government Orders referred to by the petitioner are relating to specific incidents in which the number of persons to receive accelerated promotions were specifically identified and the order restricted relief only to them. The petitioner on his own cannot canvass for a reward for his service in the absence of any legal or enforceable right on his part. Though a Government Order was referred to by him i.e., G.O.Ms.No.468 dated 19.03.1996, the said GO is of a general nature and not relating to any particular event. But in respect of events for which petitioner claims accelerated promotion namely elimination of Sandal Wood Smuggler Veerappan, the Government had exercised its discretion under the said Government Order and had issued G.O.Ms.No.1346 dated 06.12.2004 and G.O.Ms.No.468 Home (Police) Department, dated 19.03.1996. Therefore, the petitioner cannot seek to enlarge the scope of the said Government Orders and ask for further relief. 14. The contention raised by the petitioner is self-serving and not based upon any standard adopted by the State Government. Further the petitioner's promotion had to be based upon relevant Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution. Any executive order of the State Government cannot supplant those Rules. As to whether those two Government Orders issued by the State Government over which the petitioner claims parity is legally valid or not is not an issue which has to be decided in this writ petition. It is suffice to state the petitioner cannot improve upon the two orders and then claim parity in the absence of any legal right on his favour. As correctly stated in the counter affidavit, the petitioner had only discharged his official duties and it cannot be said that he had achieved extraordinary task which had to be rewarded by way of an accelerated promotion. As stated by the respondents, the petitioner was given necessary cash rewards and he cannot by invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 seeks for a direction to grant further discretionary relief from the State Government. Such a prayer cannot be countenanced by this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Court. Hence, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there will be no order as to costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar svki To 1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Home Department Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009. 2.The Director General of Police, Chennai - 600 004. 3.The Inspector General of Police, Intelligence, Chennai - 600 004. 4.The Superintendent of Police, 'Q' Branch, C.I.D., Chennai - 600 004. 1 CC to M/s.Ravichandran, Advocate, S.R.No.51827 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.51354 ORDER IN W.P.No.17579 of 2009 RS(CO) SRA(12/9/2011) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/