1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD)Nos.786 and 787 of 2011 W.A.(MD)No.786 of 2011: M.Rathinam ... Appellant Vs. 1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by Secretary to Government, Home (Police V) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 2.The Director General of Police, Chennai-4. 3.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, 307 II Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai-2. ... Respondents Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against the order of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.11435 of 2006 dated 06.08.2007. Prayer in W.P.11435 of 2006 : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondents in connection with the impugned order passed by the Second Respondent in Letter NO.D3/5584/2005, dated 25.07.2005 and to quash the same and further direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police under direct recruitment Quota for the year 1997-1998 in pursance to the order passed in W.P.No.17639 of 2001 etc dated 25.02.2005. Prayer in Rev.Appln.11 of 2006 : Review Application filed under order 47 rule 1 and 2 r/w Section 114 of the Civil Procedure Code to review the order passed by this Honourable Court in W.P.(MD).No.7470 of 2005 dated 08.09.2006 and direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub - Inspector of Police. W.A.(MD)No.787 of 2011: M.Rathinam ... Appellant Vs. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 1.State of Tamil Nadu, Rep.by Secretary to Government, Home (Police V) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police and Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board, Chennai-20. 3.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, 307 II Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai-2. ... Respondents Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against the order of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.7470 of 2005 dated 08.09.2006. WP.(MD).No.7470 of 2005 : Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records concerning the proceedings of the 2nd respondent in C.No.D1/1494/99 dated 13.4.1999 and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to select and appoint the petitioner as Sub Inspector of Police in the vacancies which arose during 1997-98 or in any one of the existing vacancies. For Appellants : Mr.Venkataramani, Senior Counsel for Mr.T.Ayangara Prabhu For Respondents : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, G.A. COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.JYOTHIMANI,J.) These Writ Appeals are directed against the orders passed by the learned Single Judges in W.P.(MD)No.7470 of 2005 dated 08.09.2006 and W.P.(MD)No.11435 of 2006 dated 06.08.2007 respectively, dismissing the Writ petitions filed by the Writ petitioners on the ground of laches. 2.The issue involved in the Writ petitions relates to appointment of Sub Inspector of Police for the year 1997-1998 in which, the Writ petitioners have made applications. It appears that in respect of some of the candidates, who were similarly situated on approaching the Tribunal certain orders were passed, against which, the matters were referred to a Division Bench of this Court. The Division Bench in W.P.Nos.17639 of 2010 etc batch in the common order dated 25.02.2005 has passed certain orders, grating relief to those persons, who were before the Court. In fact, a reference to the order of the Division Bench makes it very clear that even in respect of the applicants before the Tribunal, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 the Court has given one year time for them to approach the appropriate forum to redress their grievances. 3.As far as the Writ petitioners are concerned, admittedly, they were not the parties before the Division Bench and therefore, on the face of it, the Writ petitioners cannot claim any right over the direction given by the Division Bench. Even assuming otherwise, the Division Bench itself, in categoric terms, has stated that the persons, who have approached the Tribunal in the year 2010, should be vigilant and in any event they should have approached the appropriate authority or forum within one year. As far as the Writ petitioners are concerned, admittedly, they have filed the Writ petitions in the year 2005, challenging the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent/Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services, dated 13.04.1999. 4.Therefore, looking into any angle, the Writ petitioners cannot be said to have approached the Court, within the time stipulated by the Division Bench. Considering these things, in our view, the learned Single Judges have correctly dismissed the Writ petitions on the basis of laches, which require no interference. Therefore, the Writ Appeals fail and the same are dismissed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.side) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government, Home (Police V) Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9. 2.The Director General of Police, Chennai-4. 3.The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, 307 II Floor, Anna Salai, Chennai-2. 4.The Deputy Inspector General of Police and Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu Uniformed Service Recruitment Board, Chennai-20. nbj SR : 07.09.2011 : 3p/5c W.A.(MD)Nos.786 and 787 of 2011 18.08.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/