Madras High Court
WA/3033/2023 of STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs J.AUGUSTINE FRANCIS on 25 August 2026
WA No. 3033 of 2023
__________Page 1 of 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25-08-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN
WA No. 3033 of 2023
1. State Of Tamil NaduRep. By Its Secretary To Government, Home Department, Secretarit, Chennai-009.
2. The Director General Of Police
Mylapore, Chennai-4.
3. Additional Director General Of Police,Armed Police, Kilpauk, Chennai-10.
..Appellants
Vs
1. J.Augustine Francis, No.2, School Street, Devi Nagar, Car Shed Complex, Chennai 109.
2. K.P.Kunhikrishnan, Inspector of Police, T.S.P.IV, Battalion, Kovaipudur, Coimbatore 042.
..Respondents
Prayer : Writ Appeal under Clause XV of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 23.03.2015 made in W.P.No. 18594 of 2012.
For Appellant(s):
Ms.Y.Kavitha,
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent(s):
M/s. P. Raja For R1
WA No. 3033 of 2023
__________Page 2 of 4
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Judgment
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) State preferred the present appeal challenging the writ order dated 23.03.2015 passed in W.P.No.18594 of 2012.
2. The respondent was working as Inspector of Police. His next avenue of promotion as Assistant Commandant in Tamil Nadu Special Police. A panel of Inspectors fit for promotion to the post of Assistant Commandant for the year 2011-12 was published, The name of the respondent was not considered since he had not completed five years of service in the post of Inspector, which is the requisite qualification under Promotion Rules. However, no panel was prepared during the next year on account of pending litigations and due to the interim order passed by the Court. After disposal of the said litigations, the next panel was prepared for the year 2018-19. The respondent retired from service on 31.10.2015 on attaining the age of superannuation. Admittedly, none of the juniors to the respondent was promoted to the post of Assistant Commandant during his service till 31.10.2015.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the next panel of the year 2013-14 ought to have been prepared since this Court
WA No. 3033 of 2023 __________Page 3 of 4 directed to consider the name of the respondent during the next panel. Promotion per se is not a vested right. Consideration for promotion is a right. Filling up of the post is the prerogative of the administration. Once the decision is taken to fill up the post, the names of eligible persons waiting for promotion ought to be considered strictly in accordance with the promotion rules. In the present case, 2011-12 panel was prepared and at that time the respondent had not completed five years of experience which is mandatory under the Rules. Next panel was published in the year 2018-19. At that point of time, the respondent was not in service, since he retired from service on 31.10.2015. Therefore, there was no occasion for the authorities to consider the name of the respondent for inclusion of his name in the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Commandant.
4. In view of the above factum, the writ order impugned is set aside and the writ appeal stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (K.G.R.,J.) 25-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KST
WA No. 3033 of 2023 __________Page 4 of 4 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN J. KST WA No. 3033 of 2023 25-08-2026