1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD).No.881 of 2011 and M.P.No.2 of 2011 S.Madasamy : Appellant Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by the Director General of police, Chennai. 2.The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 27.10.2010 made in W.P.(MD).No.8687 of 2010 on the file of this Court. PRAYER in WP.8687/2010:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of writ of certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in RC.No.087845/Rect.1(2)/2009 dated 12.08.2009, and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent herein, to appoint the petitioner to the post of Grade II Police Constable or if the above post was filled up by the authorities to which the petitioner was selected, by this time, the first respondent may be directed to appoint the petitioner as and when vacancy arises for the above said post or any post carrying the same scale of pay which requires the same qualification, whichever is earlier, and pass such further or other orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For Appellant : Mr.P.Subbaraj For Respondents : Mr.R.Karthikeyan Additional Government Pleader JUDGMENT ************* [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY P.JYOTHIMANI, J] This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 27.10.2010 made in W.P.(MD).No.8687 of 2010, by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellant herein, who has challenged the orders of the Government. By virtue of the powers conferred under Rule 14(b) of the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, as amended by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.101 (Pol.9), Department, dated 30.01.2002, the application of the appellant came to be rejected on the ground that the appellant, who https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 was involved in a criminal case, was not entitled to be considered for recruitment process. 2. The reliance placed on by the learned counsel for the appellant in Commissioner of Police and others vs. Sandeep Kumar reported in 2011 (3) LLN 44 (SC) is not applicable to the facts of the present case and that was a case, where there was no Service Rule in this regard. However, on the facts of the present case, the appellant is governed by the Service Rules. 3. Inasmuch as the Rule is very clear, which has been elicited by the learned Single Judge, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge. Therefore, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar (C.S) To 1. The Director General of police, Chennai. 2. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. + 1 cc to The Special Government Pleader, SR No.32233 + 1 cc to Mr.P.Subbaraj, Advocate, SR No.32174 JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A.(MD).No.881 of 2011 19.09.2011 NB RJ/3.10.11 2p/5c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/