1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 02.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.N.BASHA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.VENUGOPAL Writ Appeal (MD)No.1174 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 A.Gnanaselvadhas ... Appellant/Petitioner Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil. ... Respondent/Respondent Writ Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order of the learned Single Judge, dated 06.09.2010, made in W.P.(MD)No.11564/2010. W.P.(MD)No.11564/2010:Praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to the Suspension order passed by the respondent against the petitioner in proceedings D.NO.591/2010 in C.No.L1/27493/2010 dated 07.06.2010[wrongly typed as 07.06.2009] and to quash the same. For Appellant : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondent : Mr.R.Anandharaj Government Advocate. JUDGMENT [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY K.N.BASHA, J] The appellant has come forward with this appeal challenging the order of the writ court, dated 06.09.2010, made in W.P.(MD)No.11564 of 2010, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the order of suspension passed by the respondent on the ground of his implication in a criminal case. 2.Mr.R.Anandharaj, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondent. By mutual consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final hearing at the time of admission itself. 3.Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would now submit that though the appellant has challenged the impugned order of the writ court, in view of the change of circumstance to the effect that subsequent to the passing of the order by the writ court, the very criminal proceedings itself has been quashed by this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15344 of 2010, by the order dated 28.04.2011 and on the basis of the quashing of the criminal proceedings, the appellant has made https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 a representation to the respondent seeking revocation of the suspension order and, therefore, the said representation may be directed to be considered by the respondent. 4.Heard the learned Government Advocate on the above submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. 5.We have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the order passed by the writ court as well as the orders of this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15344 of 2010, dated 28.04.2011, quashing the criminal proceedings initiated against the appellant herein. 6.The fact remains that subsequent to the order passed by the writ court, the very criminal proceedings initiated against the appellant itself was quashed by this court in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.15344/2010, by order dated 28.04.2011. Considering the fact that the suspension order was passed against the appellant only on the basis of his implication in a criminal case and now the criminal case itself has been quashed and as such the appellant has preferred a representation before the respondent seeking revocation of the suspension order, without going into the merits of the representation dated 07.06.2011, we are constrained to direct the respondent herein, namely the Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil, to consider the representation of the petitioner, dated 07.06.2011, by affording an opportunity to the petitioner and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7.With the above direction, the writ appeal stands disposed of. No costs. Connected M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 is closed. gb Sd/- Assistant Registrar[Records] /True copy/ To Sub Assistant Registrar THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT AT NAGERCOIL. +1 CC TO M/S.T.LAJAPATHI ROY, ADVOCATE SR.NO.37793. +1 CC TO SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR.NO.37824. Judgment IN W.A.(MD)No.1174/2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 Dated:02.11.2011 2P/4C RPB : 14.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/