M.MAHENDRAN,(47/2022) vs The Government of Tamil Nadu,

2026:MHC:1780
W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on Pronounced on
27.04.2026 27.05.2026
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.SURESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR
W.P.(MD).Nos.7350, 21789 & 25923 of 2022 &
W.P.(MD)No.17294 of 2020 & W.A.(MD)Nos.1191, 1192 &
1159 to 1165 of 2020 & W.P.Nos.16349 of 2023 & W.P.Nos.14645 &
14646 of 2016 & W.P.No.20152 of 2020 & W.P.No.21013 of 2024 and
W.A.Nos.457 & 459 of 2026
and connected miscellaneous petitions
[W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022]
1. M.Mahendran
2. K.Chithravel .. Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Through its Secretary, Home Department
Secretariat, Fort St. George
Chennai – 9.
2. The Director General of Police
O/o. The Director General of Police
Post Box No.601, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.
3. C.Gangatharan
4. J.Jayaseelan
5. V.Maheswaran
6. T.Nagarajan
1/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
7. A.Muthuselvam
8. K.C.Ramasamy
9. D.Venkadesan
[R3 to R9 impleaded vide order dated 21.06.2023
in W.M.P.No.17694 of 2023 in
W.P.(MD)No.7350 of 2022] .. Respondents
Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.7350 of 2022 : Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of declaration, declaring that the
Rule 3(b)(ii)(b) under the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate
Service, as illegal and unconstitutional with reference to preparation of list
for promotion to the posts as range basis and consequently directing the
respondents to draw state seniority list for promotion by considering the date
of their enlistment as seniority within the time period stipulated by this
Court.
[W.P.(MD).No.21789 of 2022]
1. G.Vadamalai
2. V.Harikrishnan
3. T.Senthil Kumar
4. D.Stephen
5. M.Somasundaram
6. M. Abdullah Sahib
7. B.Philip Xavier
8. D.Sivakumar
9. K.Balamurugan
10. R.Kannan
11. G.Ramalingam
12. N.Sekar
13. K.Raja
14. G.Swaminathan .. Petitioners
Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Secretary,
Department of Home,
Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
2. The Director General of Police
No.1, Dr.Radhakrishnan Road,
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Additional Director General of Police
Administration,
No.1, Dr.Radhakrishnan Road,
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
4. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Trichy Range, Trichy District - 620 020.
5. Kavitha
6. Arjunan
7. Periyasamy
8. Thiyagarajan
9. Anbalagan
10. Muthaiyan
11. Manikandan
12. Dhanavel
13. Gandhiraj
14. Thangaraj
15. Sankar
16. Kathirvel
17. Vijayakumar
18. Sridhar
19. Chandabose
20. Rajappan
21. Kolanchi
22. Velusamy
23. Ulaganathan
24. Selvanayagam
25. Seeman
26. Jegankumar
27. Chandirabose
28. K.Venkatesh Babu
29. S.Arngaraj
30. D.Viswanathan
3/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
31. S.Chinnadurai
32. S.Muthukrishnan
33. R.Stephen
34. M.Alagar
35. M.Sakthivel
36. P.Rathinam
37. P.Velmurugan
38. S.Senthilkumar
39. M.Kumaran
40. R.Sundarapandiyan
41. T.Ramesh
42. S.P.Singaram .. Respondents
Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.21789 of 2022 : Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari, calling for the records
relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the third respondent
Additional Director General of Police in Rc.No.10217/NGB V(2)/2019,
dated 25.08.2022 revising the 'C' list of Head Constables (Armed Reserve)
fit for promotion as Sub Inspectors (Armed Reserve) for the year 2015 and
2017, quash the same as illegal and void.
[W.P.(MD).No.25923 of 2022]
1. R.Muthukumar
2. Raja
3. A.Dhanasekaran
4. G.Rajendran
5. S.Kamala
6. D.R.Ravindran
7. P.Maniraj
8. S.Kaangu
9. S.Kanaiyaram
10. R.Saravana Kumar .. Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Through its Secretary, Home Department
Secretariat, Fort St. George
4/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Chennai – 9.
2. The Director General of Police
O/o. The Director General of Police
Post Box No.601, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. .. Respondents
Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.25923 of 2022 : Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of declaration, declaring that the
Rule 3(b)(ii)(b) under the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate
Service, as illegal and unconstitutional with reference to preparation of list
for promotion to the posts as range basis and consequently directing the
respondents to draw state seniority list for promotion by considering the date
of their enlistment as seniority within the time period stipulated by this
Court.
[W.P.(MD).No.17294 of 2020]
1. T.Bala Selvan
2. S.Sam Sundar Singh
3. S.Justin Paul
4. J.John Wisely
5. J.Deva Shayam
6. M.Mahendran
7. V.Madhu Soodhanan
8. S.Kavi
9. S.Suresh
10. S.Anandha Raj
11. S.Gobi
12. P.Abraham Rao
13. S.Suresh Kumar
14. T.Justin
15. T.Renganathan
16. J.Alexander
17. G.Amathu Arasu
18. C.Mohan Raj
19. R.Murugaboopathi
20. V.Murugesan
5/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
21. C.Sudha Rani
22. D.Jameela Anna Selvi
23. M.Mahalingam .. Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Government of Tamil Nadu
Through its Secretary,
Home Department
Secretariat, Fort St. George
Chennai – 9.
2. The Director General of Police
O/o. The Director General of Police
Post Box No.601, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. .. Respondents
Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.17294 of 2020 : Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call
for the records pertaining to the impugned order
Rc.No.54321/NGBV(2)/2019, dated 26.02.2020 on the file of the
respondent No.2 and quash the same as illegal insofar as petitioners are
concerned and consequently direct the respondents to promote the
petitioners as Sub-Inspector of Police (Armed Reserve) considering the dae
of their enlistment seniority.
[W.A.(MD).No.1191 of 2020]
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. By its Secretary
Department of Home, Fort St. George
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police
No.1, Dr. Radhakrishnan Road
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Trichy Range, Trichy District – 620 020. .. Appellants
6/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Vs.
1. S.Mohan Raj
2. R.Baskar
3. G.Sivasubramanian
4. K.Murugesan
5. K.Venkatesh Babu
6. S.Arngaraj
7. D.Viswanathan
8. S.Chinnadurai
9. S.Muthukrishnan
10. R.Stephen
11. M.Alagar
12. M.Sakthivel
13. P.Rathinam
14. P.Velmurugan
15. S.Senthilkumar
16. M.Kumaran
17. R.Sundarapandiyan
18. T.Ramesh
19. S.P.Singaram .. Respondents
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1191 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3528 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
[W.A.(MD).No.1192 of 2020]
1. The Secretary to Government
Home Police Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St. George
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police
Chennai – 600 004.
7/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Ramanathapuram Range, Ramanathapuram .. Appellants
Vs.
1. S.Parthiban
2. T.Kannan
3. N.Balasubramanian
4. A.Ilangovan .. Respondents
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1192 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.1554 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
[W.A.Nos.1159 to 1165 of 2020]
1. The Secretary to Government
Home Police Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police,
Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Madurai Range, Madurai.
4. The Chairman
Range Promotion Board,
Madurai Range & Superintendent of Police,
Madurai District. .. Appellants in
all the writ appeals
Vs.
1. A.Kannan
2. P.Lingiah .. Respondents in
W.A.(MD).No.1159/2020
8/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
1. K.Thulasidass
2. P.Devadoss .. Respondents in
W.A.(MD).No.1160/2020
1. D.Ravichandran
2. P.Devadoss .. Respondents in
W.A.(MD).No.1161/2020
1. M.Sivakumar
2. P.Devadoss .. Respondents in
W.A.(MD).No.1162/2020
1. C.Chinnasamy
2. P.Lingiah .. Respondents in
W.A.(MD).No.1163/2020
1. S.Ramasamy
2. P.Devadoss .. Respondents in
W.A.(MD).No.1164/2020
1. M.James
2. P.Devadoss .. Respondents in
W.A.(MD).No.1165/2020
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1159 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3211 of 2019 etc., batch cases.

Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1160 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3206 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1161 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3210 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1162 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3209 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1163 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3208 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
9/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1164 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3207 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
Prayer in W.A.(MD)No.1165 of 2020 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment dated 06.01.2020 made in W.P.
(MD).No.3094 of 2019 etc., batch cases.
[W.P.No.16349 of 2023]
1. P.Jayan
2. K.Kandaswamy
3. M.Sekar
4. Y.Bharath
5. K.Babu
6. K.M.Abdul Majeeth
7. P.S.Rajendran
8. P.A.Krishnaraj
9. B.Sekar
10. D.Gnanavel
11. I.Mohamed Mohideen Shah
12. K.Chandramohan .. Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Secretary to Government
Home (Pol. II) Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
2. The Director General of Police
Head of Police Force - Tamil Nadu,
Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.
3. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai City,
Veppery, Chennai - 7.
4. The Commissioner of Police
10/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Avadi City, Chennai.
5. The Commissioner of Police
Tambaram City, Chennai. .. Respondents
Prayer in W.P.No.16349 of 2023 : Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for
the records of the respondents in connection with the impugned
memorandum issued by the second respondent in
Rc.No.NGB-I(1)/E/0013/2023 dated 26.04.2023 and the consequential order
of the third respondent in Rc.No.Estt.II(3)/52/29937/2023 dated 04.05.2023
for drawal of 'C' List of Sub-Inspector of Police (AR) fit for promotion as
Inspector of Police (AR) for the year 2023, quash the same and direct the
respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for inclusion of their
name as per date of enlistment seniority in the cadre of Gr.II Police
Constable by taking into consideration the Judgment of the Madurai Bench
of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.1554 of 2019 etc. batch dated 05.01.2020 and
include their name in the 'C' List of Sub-Inspector of Police (AR) fit for
promotion as Inspector of Police (AR) for the year 2023 and promote them
as Inspector of Police (AR) with all consequential service and monetary
benefits.
[W.P.No.14645 of 2016]
V.Mahendran .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Secretary to Government
Home (Police) Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai,
Veppery, Chennai - 600 007. .. Respondents
11/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Prayer in W.P.No.14645 of 2016 : Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for
the records of the second respondent in connection with the impugned order
passed by him in Na.Ka.No.187/6905/PaPe.7(1)/2015 dated 07.03.2016 and
to quash the same and further direct the respondents to promote the
petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police on par with his junior by taking into
consideration of his entry level seniority.
[W.P.No.14646 of 2016]
P.Raj .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Secretary to Government
Home (Police) Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai,
Veppery, Chennai - 600 007. .. Respondents
Prayer in W.P.No.14646 of 2016 : Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for
the records of the second respondent in connection with the impugned order
passed by him in Na.Ka.No.187/6905/PaPe.7(1)/2015 dated 07.03.2016 and
to quash the same and further direct the respondents to promote the
petitioner as Sub-Inspector of Police on par with his junior by taking into
consideration of his entry level seniority.
[W.P.No.20152 of 2020]
K.Balaji .. Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
12/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Rep. by its Secretary,
Home Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
2. The Director General of Police
Dr.Radhakrishnan Salai,
Chennai - 600 004. .. Respondents
Prayer in W.P.No.20152 of 2020 : Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking a writ of declaration, declaring the records
relating to the memorandum issued by the second respondent in
Rc.No.NGB1(1)/007979/2020, dated 19.11.2020 as null and void as the
Division of Zonal Promotion passed against the order passed in W.P.
(MD).Nos.1554, 3094, 3206, 23211, 3206 to 3211 and 3528 of 2019, dated
06.01.2020 and consequently direct the respondents to prepare the state-wise
seniority list.
[W.P.No.21013 of 2024]
1. G.Thangaraj
2. B.Loganathan
3. R.Ramachandran
4. L.Anandarajan
5. R.Kulanthai Samy
6. R.Murugesan
7. V.Kannathal
8. J.Gopinath
9. S.Baskaran
10. J.Jose Salim Kumar .. Petitioners
Vs.
1. The Secretary to Government
Home (Police) Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
13/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
3. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai,
Veppery, Chennai - 600 007.
4. R.Rangarajan
5. S.Shanmugaraja
6. R.Balamurugan
7. P.Dharmaraj
8. A.Selvanayagam
9. K.Venkatesan
10. R.Mahendran
11. I.Suresh
12. S.Devanathan
13. P.J.Mohankumar
14. S.Natarajan
15. P.Sivakumar
16. P.Kannan
17. M.Kumararaja
18. T.Sathishkumar .. Respondents
(R4 to R18 impleaded vide order dated
18.02.2026 made in W.M.P.No.7159 of 2026
in W.P.No.21013 of 2024)
Prayer in W.P.No.21013 of 2024 : Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for
the records of the second respondent in connection with the impugned order
passed by him in Rc.NGB-I(1)/E/0020/2024, dated 09.07.2024 and the
consequential order passed by the third respondent in
Rc.No.Estt.II(3)/50/47288/2024 dated 18.07.2024 and quash the same and
further direct the respondents to effect the promotion by taking into
consideration of the entry level seniority or in alternate to promote the
petitioners as Sub-Inspector of Police and the further promotion on par with
their juniors.
[W.A.Nos.457 & 459 of 2026]
1. The Director General of Police
14/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Chennai - 600 004.
2. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Coimbatore Range, Coimbatore - 18. .. Appellants in
both the writ appeals
Vs.
T.Senbagavadivu .. Respondent in
W.A.(MD).No.457/2026
M.Umarani .. Respondent in
W.A.(MD).No.459/2026
Prayer in W.A.No.457 of 2026 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment, dated 18.11.2022 made in
W.P.No.15875 of 2019 and allow this Writ Appeal.
Prayer in W.A.No.459 of 2026 : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the
Letters Patent, to set aside the Judgment, dated 18.11.2022 made in
W.P.No.15871 of 2019 and allow this Writ Appeal.
Case No. For Petitioner(s) /
For Respondent(s)
Appellant(s)
W.P.(MD).No.7350
of 2022
Ms.M.Muthu Yazhini
for M/s.Lajapathy Roy &
Associates
Mr.P.S.Raman, Advocate
General assisted by Mr.S.John
J.Rajasingh, AGP for R1 and
R2
Mr.L.Chandrakumar for R3 to
R9
W.P.(MD).No.21789
of 2022
Mr.P.Godson Swaminath
for M/s. Issac Chambers
Mr.P.S.Raman, Advocate
General assisted by Mr.S.John
J.Rajasingh, AGP for R1 to R4
Mr.V.Panneerselvam for R6 to
R9 and R16 to R19
RR 21, 37, 39 and 40 - Not
Ready in Notice
RR 5, 10 to 15, 20, 22 to 36,
38, 41 and 42 - No Appearance
W.P.(MD).No.25923
of 2022
Ms.M.Muthu Yazhini
for M/s.Lajapathy Roy &
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted by
15/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Case No. For Petitioner(s) /
For Respondent(s)
Appellant(s)
Associates Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh, AGP
for R1 and R2
W.P.(MD).No.17294
of 2020
Ms.M.Muthu Yazhini
for M/s.Lajapathy Roy &
Associates
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted by
Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh, AGP
for R1 and R2
W.A.(MD).No.1191
of 2020
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted
by Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh,
AGP
Mr.P.Godson Swaminath
for M/s. Isaac Chambers for R1
W.A.(MD).No.1192
of 2020 and 1159 to
1165 of 2020
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted
by Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh,
AGP
W.P.No.16349 of
2023
Mr.K.Venkataramani,
Senior Counsel
for Mr.M.Muthappan
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted by
Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh, AGP
for R1 to R5
W.P.No.14645 of
2016
Mr.K.S.Viswanathan,
Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.Sivakumar
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted by
Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh, AGP
for R1 to R3
W.P.No.14646 of
2016
Mr.Ali Hassan Khan Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted by
Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh, AGP
for R1 to R3
W.P.No.20152 of
2020
Mr.K.Venkataramani,
Senior Counsel
for Mr.M.Muthappan
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted by
Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh, AGP
for R1 and R2
W.P.No.21013 of
2024
Mr.K.S.Viswanathan,
Senior Counsel
for Mr.S.Sivakumar
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted by
Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh, AGP
for R1 to R3
Mr.G.Sankaran
Senior Counsel
for M/s. S.Nedunchezhiyan &
Mr.J.Jayamalan for R4 to R18
16/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Case No. For Petitioner(s) /
For Respondent(s)
Appellant(s)
W.A.Nos.457 and
459 of 2026
Mr.P.S.Raman,
Advocate General assisted
by Mr.S.John J.Rajasingh,
AGP
Mr.G.Bala
for M/s. Bala & Daisy
COMMON ORDER
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
The issue raised in this batch of cases since is one and the same, all
these cases were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.
2. The prayer sought for in these cases are two fold. In one set of
cases, the prayer sought for is a writ of declaration declaring that the Rule
3(b)(ii)(b) of Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service, as
illegal and unconstitutional and for consequential relief and another set of
cases were filed seeking a relief of quashment of C-list or promotion list
issued by the employers / state police authorities in respect of promotion to
the post of Sub-Inspectors of Police or the Inspectors of Police as the case
maybe and for consequential relief.
3. In both the set of prayers, the consequential relief was to seek a
direction to the employer / respondents State to draw a list of seniority on
17/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
the basis of State wide seniority based on the date of enlistment, i.e., from
the Constabulary stage of police constables and accordingly give the
promotion as per the seniority for the post of Sub-Inspector of Police or the
Inspector of Police as the case may be.
4. Since the issue is common and facts are also similar, for the sake of
brevity and for better understanding of the cases the facts projected in W.P.
(MD).No.7350 of 2022 are traversed herein.
5. That the petitioners in this writ petition were selected and recruited
as Grade II Police Constable and in respect of the first petitioner, he joined
on 09.06.1993 as Grade II Police Constable and in respect of the second writ
petitioner, he joined as Grade II Police Constable on 31.10.1997.
6. As per the procedure in vogue, the selection and recruitment was
made by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board through a
common recruitment for the cadre of Grade II Police Constable along with
the post of Fireman and Jail Warden.
18/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
7. After having been selected, the selectees were posted as Grade II
Police Constable in Tamil Nadu Special Police and after working for some
years, they would be transferred to Armed Reserve in various Districts or
Range. Insofar as these petitioners are concerned, they were allotted to
Nilgris Range and Tuticorin Range or Nilgris District or Tuticorin District
respectively.
8. As per the procedure which is in vogue, a police constable who has
been recruited and enlisted as Grade II Police Constable would be given
promotion as Grade I Police Constable on completion of 10 years successful
completion as Grade II Police Constable. Thereafter on completion of five
years service as Grade II Police Constable, he would be further promoted as
Head Constable and after total service of 25 years, i.e., 10+5+10, the Head
Constable would be further promoted as Special Sub-Inspector. Then the
next promotional avenue would be Sub-Inspector of Police which would
always be made subject to availability of vacancies in the Armed Reserve
and the next hierarchy of post for promotion is Inspector of Police.
19/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
9. It is the further case projected by the petitioners that originally the
post of Sub-Inspector of Police would be filled up under two method, one is
Direct Recruitment, another is promotional method. Insofar as the
promotional category is concerned, those who have completed this 25 years
of total service and working as Head Constable (Armed Reserve) would be
considered for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police by the
Range Promotion Board after conducting a test as per Rule 3(d)(iii) of the
Special Rules. However the said procedure of conducting a Range
Promotion Board Test was dispensed with by deleting the same by virtue of
G.O.Ms.No.1055, Home (Police-III) Department, dated 01.11.2006, thereby
since then the promotion would be made to the post of Sub-Inspector of
Police (Armed Reserve) merely on seniority and service record basis.
10. In this context, it is the further case of the petitioners that rule 3(b)
(ii)(b) of the Special Rules prescribes the method of promotion to be
followed and the same prescribes Range wise seniority. In other words even
though the Grade II Police Constable were selected and recruited by a
common selection method, they would be distributed to various Districts or
Ranges and once they distributed to a particular District, their seniority
20/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
would be maintained by the Range Promotion Board consisting of two three
Districts or a City.
11. When that being so, the next level of promotion to the post of
Grade I Police Constable, Head Constable, Sub-Inspector of Police and
Inspector of Police, all would be made only on the basis of the Range wise
seniority. By virtue of this method being adopted by the employer, in some
Ranges depending upon the availability of the vacancy, quick promotions
would be given to these kind of incumbents to various stages like Head
Constable, Sub-Inspector of Police, Inspector of Police, whereas in some
other ranges, in view of want of vacancy such promotion would get delayed.
Resultant situation would be, in some of the Ranges / Districts, Juniors
would get promotion and in some of the Districts and Ranges, the Seniors
would get stagnated without getting promotion. After getting promotions,
transfers also would be made either on the Administrative grounds or on the
request of the individuals and if they come and join in the desired Range or
District where they may occupy in the higher position like Head Constable,
Sub-Inspector of Police or Inspector of Police as the case may be, whereas
in the very same Range or District, the seniors of them, based on the
21/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
enlistment originally made at the time of recruitment, would be working in
the lower post for want of vacancy, thereby the Seniors have to work under
the Juniors. This has completely shatter the morale of many number of
incumbents in the police force in the State of Tamil Nadu as it create heavy
heart burning among many number of police personnel in the State.
12. Therefore only in order to rectify this anomaly by operating the
promotional avenue only on the basis of the State wide seniority instead of
Range wise or District wise seniority many number of police personnel have
been consistently making the plea and with the result only this kind of
litigations have come.
13. In fact in earlier occasions at least two or three round of litigations
were filed whenever such kind of C-list are issued by the employer / Home
Department of the State fixing the seniority for promotion to various
incumbents in the police force at the level of Head Constable, Sub-Inspector
of Police and Inspector of Police and whenever such kind of C-list was
published, challenging the same, the affected personnel had come to the
Court where the verdict so far have been made are in favour of the
22/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
employees to consider their case for giving promotion on the basis of the
State wide seniority by taking into account of the date of enlistment for the
purpose of making further promotions at various hierarchies like Head
Constable, Sub Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police.
14. Despite these decisions have been made, the situation has not
improved, as time time and again, the employer, i.e., the Home Department
or Director General of Police or Head of the Police force show the rule,
especially rule 3(b)(ii)(b) of the Special Rules as mentioned above, where
the method of promotion as indicated therein is to be adopted only by
preparing the seniority list by the Range Promotion Board by adopting the
Range wise seniority, thereby the Seniors are denied promotions whereas
the Juniors are getting promotion to various hierarchy level of post as
indicated above.
15. Hence in order to rectify these anomaly and to correct the system
by adopting the State wide seniority since rule 3(b)(ii)(b) of the Special
Rules is considered to be a hindrance, it triggered the writ petitioners to
challenge the said rule and seeking for a writ of declaration declaring the
23/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
said rule as unlawful and unconstitutional. That is how this writ petition had
been filed.
16. Many number of writ petitions have been filed with the similar
prayer and in some cases, the C-list or promotion panel prepared and
released Range wise by the employer have been questioned and in all these
cases, the consequential relief sought for is to give a direction to the
employer, Home Department of the State to draw a State wide seniority list
by dispensing with or doing away the method of adopting the Range wise
seniority and accordingly, operate the promotions by strictly following the
State wide seniority, thereby the Seniors would get promotion when their
turn comes. This is how all these litigations had been placed before us in this
batch of cases for adjudication and decision.
17. Before delve into the issue raised in this batch of cases, let us see
what is the exact rule which is under challenge herein, i.e., rule 3(b)(ii)(b)
which is extracted here under:
“ 3. Method of appointment and promotion
Added as per G.O.Ms.No.2611,
Home (Pol III) Dated 19.11.84.
(a) (I) Appointment to the
several classes and categories
24/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
shall be made as indicated in
Annexure I.
Added in G.O.Ms.No.2611,
Home (Pol III) Dated 19.11.84.
(ii) Persons who were already
included in the ‘C’ list for a
particular year but not
promoted before the expiry of
the validity of the said list shall
be considered for a higher
place in the list drawn in the
subsequent years on merits of
each case in preference to other
persons included in ‘C’ list.
   
(b)(i) Promotion to the under
mentioned posts shall be made
on the grounds of merit and
ability, seniority being
considered only where merit
and ability are approximately
equal:
 
Inspectors, Inspector of Police
(Finger Print)
Senior Reporters, Shorthand
Bureau, Vellore.
Sub Inspectors, Sub Inspectors
of Police (Finger Print)
Inspector (Armed Reserve)
Sub Inspectors (Armed Reserve)
Head Constables including
Band Head Constables, Office
of the Director General of
Police, Chennai.
Reserve Head Constables
including Armourers, Signallers
and Motor Transport Drivers.
 
(ii) Such promotion shall be
25/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
made from a list of qualified
candidates suitable for
promotion prepared and
finalized by
 
(a) The State Promotion Board
constituted by the Govt. from
time to time subject to the
approval of the Director
General of Police in the case of
promotion to the posts of
Inspectors, Inspector (Finger
Print), Inspectors (Armed
Reserve) and Senior Reporters,
Shorthand Bureau, Chennai,
from the ranks of Sub
Inspectors, Sub Inspector
(Finger Print), Sub-Inspectors
(Armed Reserve) and Junior
Reporters, respectively.
(b) The Range Promotion
Boards in respect of various
units as detailed below, subject
to the approval of the Deputy
Inspector General of Police or
concerned Commissioners of
Police in Cities and
Commissioner of Police,
Chennai, as the case may be, in
respect of promotion from the
posts of Head Constables to
Sub Inspectors. (There shall be
only one combined list for
promotion from the rank of
Head Constables to Sub
Inspectors)
Substituted in G.O.Ms.No.91, The Range Promotion Board of
26/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Home (Pol VI) Department
Dated 6.2.2001.
the Range specified in column
(1) of the Table below shall
consist of the District and Unit
specified in the corresponding
entires in column (2) thereof.”
18. In the said Rule 3(b)(ii)(b) of Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police
Subordinate Service, it has been made that the promotion shall be made
from a list of candidates suitable for promotion prepared and finalised by the
Range Promotion Board in respect of various units. The various units
means, according to the rule, there are 27 such units have been mentioned
like Chennai city Range, Chennai Urban, Kancheepuram, Crime Branch,
Dindigul Range, Ramanathapuram Range, Madurai Range, Tirunelveli
Range, Vellore Range, Villupuram Range etc.,
19. The meaning thereby, in order to make promotion to the post of
Head Constable, Sub-Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police, the
incumbents Range wise seniority alone would be taken into account.
Illustratively in Tirunelveli Range, there are three Districts included
namely,Tirunelveli, Tuticorin and Kanniyakumari and in these three
Districts, those who are working in the police force in the Armed Reserve
27/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
would be put together to prepare a Range wise seniority list under various
categories like Grade II Police Constable, Grade I Police Constable, Head
Constable, Sub-Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police, accordingly on
the basis of the vacancy that arise in these three Districts in the Tirunelveli
Range, panel would be prepared by the Range Promotion Board under Rule
3(b)(ii)(b) as referred to above and accordingly, promotion would be given.
20. In this context, suppose in Tiruchirapalli City Police Range or
Chennai City Police Range, if vacancy arises in these categories, for which,
seniority list is prepared on the basis of the Range wise seniority by the
Range Promotion Board and accordingly if promotions are effected, because
of want of vacancies, many incumbents under various categories in these
ranges who are otherwise Seniors comparing with their batchmates who are
spreading over various other Range in the State of Tamil Nadu would not be
considered for promotion even though they are Seniors in State wide
Seniority on the basis of the enlistment.
21. Because of this position of adopting the method of Range wise
seniority for the purpose of promotion, in many Ranges seniors are getting
28/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
stagnated without getting promotion, whereas Juniors in some Ranges are
getting promotion. Because of this kind of anomaly and the promotion being
provided to the Juniors, whereas it is denied or stagnated in respect of
Seniors, the seniors are getting affected, that completely shatters the morale
of the Senior police incumbents in the police force, thereby their morale is
getting affected and that creates heavy heartburn among the rank and file of
the police force throughout the State.
22. Only in this context, the challenge now has been made ultimately
against rule 3(b)(ii)(b) on various grounds.
23. The learned Senior counsel and counsel appearing for the
petitioners / employees have made elaborate submissions challenging the
said Rule and the difficulties faced by senior incumbents as the juniors are
getting quick promotions whereas seniors are denied such promotion only
because of the method being adopted by the employer. It is their argument
that, originally there was a Range Promotion Board Test conducted every
year which was dispensed with by the orders of the Government in
G.O.Ms.No.1055, Home Department, dated 01.11.2006, wherein the Range
29/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Promotion Board Test was dispensed with and promotion to the post of Sub-
Inspector of Police is granted based on seniority and service records.
24. In some of the cases based on 25 years seniority rule they got
promotion to the post of Special Sub-Inspector and then Sub-Inspector of
Police, where they successfully completed the probation and their name
have been included in the B-list of Head Constable, Special Sub-Inspector
of Police fit for promotion as Sub-Inspector of Police for the year 2018.
However till now they have not been given promotion and in fact by the
impugned memorandum in some of the cases such kind of B-list have been
cancelled or the names of these incumbents have been omitted to be
considered for promotion.
25. There was an artificial cut-off date fixed as 31.12.2015. Those
who have been appointed and promoted as Sub-Inspector of Police (Armed
Reserve) on regular basis on or before 31.12.2015 alone were considered to
be promoted as Inspector of Police and those who have been given
promotion subsequent to 31.12.2015 or become eligible to be promoted after
31.12.2015 would not be considered was the memorandum issued in this
30/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
regard by the employer which was also under challenge.
26. It is their further argument that, the Grade II Police Constable are
recruited by the Recruitment Board and after institutional training, they were
directed to serve in the Battalions for the period of four years and thereafter
transferred to either the District or City Armed Reserve depending upon the
vacancies available. Each District / City has got different cadre strength in
the cadre of Grade II Police Constable, Grade I Police Constable and Head
Constable. In some Districts, promotion to the post of Head Constable is
made much earlier than in some of the other Districts as well as in the city
police.
27. Since the quick promotion could not be earned in majority
Districts, the upgradation policy was introduced by the Government
whereby a Grade II Police Constable on completion of 10 years service is
upgraded as Grade I Police Constable, thereafter the Grade I Police
Constable on completion of five years of service is upgraded as Head
Constable and the Head Constable on completion of 10 years of service is
upgraded as Special Sub-Inspector of Police. However the further regular
31/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (Armed Reserve) is made
by taking into consideration the seniority in the feeder category post namely
the Sub-Inspector of Police Armed Reserve as well as the Date of Birth.
28. It is the further argument of them that, as per the service rules if
any Constable is recruited after 1997 by a common recruitment, the seniority
is based on the marks obtained by him in the test held at the end of the
institutional training conducted in the police recruitment school irrespective
of following the rule of reservation at the time of recruitment.
29. Because of the Range wise seniority, in some Districts, the
promotion to the post of Head Constable is quickly served, whereas in some
Districts and in Chennai City Police, the promotion to the post of Head
Constable is based on completion of total service of 15 years as Grade II
Police Constable which includes five years of Grade I Police Constable.
30. They referred to a decision of this Court in W.P.(MD).No . 1554 of
2019 etc., batch where by an order dated 06.01.2020, this court quashing the
32/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
memorandum of Director General of Police dated 21.12.2018, which was
issued for promotion of C-list of Head Constable fit for promotion as Sub-
Inspector of Police for the year 2018 and directed to consider the claim of
the petitioners therein for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police
Armed Reserve on the basis of the seniority in the cadre of Grade II Police
Constable. Therefore by virtue of the said Judgment, the entry level
seniority as Grade II Police Constable is a criteria for consideration of claim
for promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police in the Range Promotion
Board. Hence the same criteria has to be followed while preparing the C-list
of Sub-Inspector of Police fit for promotion as Inspector of Police.
31. It is their further submission that the Judgment of the Madurai
Bench of this Court, dated 06.01.2020 though had been appealed before
Division Bench, which is still pending where no orders have been passed so
far, therefore, according to them, the order dated 06.01.2020 is final.
32. Therefore their contention is that, there has been no nexus
between the classification and the object to be achieved by artificially
making a Range wise seniority for giving promotion to the Police
33/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Constables to various range of promotional post up to the level of Inspector
of Police. The impugned rule namely Rule 3(b)(ii)(b) only speaks about the
Range Promotion Board for preparation of the seniority list and on what
basis such a Range Promotion Board has been constituted and why a Range
wise seniority has been instituted upon despite the fact that the Recruitment
is one and the same and there would be a single recruitment where all such
incumbents are initially recruited and enlisted as Grade II Police Constable,
is not known.
33. Therefore cumulatively the adoption of the method of Range wise
seniority for giving promotion to the police personnel to various
promotional categories like Head Constable, Sub-Inspector of Police and
Inspector of Police is absolutely unjustifiable and unlawful and also
violative of Article 14 of the Constitution under service jurisprudence and
therefore the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend
that the said rules could be declared to be illegal and unconstitutional and a
consequential direction to adopt the State wise seniority for giving
promotion to these categories in the police force in the State of Tamil Nadu
may be issued.
34/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
34. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners /
employees and the learned Advocate General for the State. The learned
Advocate General, Mr.P.S.Raman, while arguing the case was requested to
get instructions from the Government as to whether the Government has got
any proposal to resolve this issue amicably since the adoption of the Range
wise seniority without any plausible reason for giving promotion to the
police force under various categories as stated supra since creates lot of
anomaly and thereby the morale of the police force is getting shattered, he
had stated that the issue would be brought to the notice of the State
Government and after having consultation with them, the necessary proposal
to resolve the issue by adopting the State wide seniority atleast prospectively
would be worked out and placed before this Court.
35. In this regard, the learned Advocate General had given certain
statistical particulars as to how many such senior people who get affected
because of the adoption of the Range wise seniority and in case if the
Government has come forward to implement the State wise seniority
35/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
prospectively what could be the consequences, where how many of the
Seniors who are otherwise affected because of the Range wise seniority
would get promotions by adopting the State wise seniority for whom
whether the necessary vacancies are available and if not whether
supernumerary vacancies can be created as a one time measure to adopt all
these incumbents without disturbing the Juniors who already earned
promotion by virtue of the Range wise seniority.
36. When such a submissions were made by the learned Advocate
General on behalf of the State having recorded the same we have passed the
following order on 18.02.2026 :
"1. On the basis of the arguments advanced, on the
earlier hearing, by the learned counsel for the
parties as well as the learned Advocate General
appearing for the State, the Court requested the
learned Advocate General to get the stand of the
Government of Tamil Nadu, regarding whether the
State Wide Seniority, right from the inception of
the Tamil Nadu Police Force, i.e. Enlistment of
Grade II Head Constable Level, can be adopted
and if so, at least prospectively if the State Wide
Seniority System is adopted, because of the Range
36/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Wise Seniority hitherto followed, the affected
members of the Force, who are otherwise eligible
to get promotion to the post of Sub Inspector of
Police and further promotion to the post of
Inspector of Police, but have been stagnated,
without earning the said promotion, whether can be
rescued, by creating supernumerary posts,
wherever it is required, apart from filling up the
available vacancies in two cadres, namely, Sub
Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police, Armed
Reserve.
2. On the said request made to the learned
Advocate General appearing for the State to have a
consultation with the Government of Tamil Nadu
and report before this Court, today when the cases
are taken up for hearing, the learned Advocate
General, having consulted with the State
Government, has made the following submissions:-
i. That the Government, in principle, has come
forward to implement the State Wide Seniority,
instead of Range Wise Seniority, for the purpose of
fixing the inter se seniority, among the members of
the Force in various cadres, especially for the
purpose of promotion to the post of Sub Inspector
of Police and also for further promotion to the post
of Inspector of Police, prospectively.
37/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
ii. However, because of the implementation of the
Range Wise Seniority, hither to had been made, at
present, there are 296 Sub Inspectors, in the Armed
Reserve, available to get promotion to the post of
Inspector of Police, Armed Reserve. However, the
available vacancy for the post of Inspector of
Police, Armed Reserve, as of now, is only 106.
Therefore, after filling up those 106 vacancies, still
190 incumbents are to be given promotion to the
post of Inspector of Police in the Armed Reserve.
190 supernumerary posts in the cadre of Inspector
of Police, Armed Reserve would be created by the
Government, for which, the financial commitment
would roughly be about Rs.1.8 crores.
iii. Like that, for the post of Sub Inspector of
Police, Armed Reserve, there are 1335 members of
the police force in the feeder category in the cadre
of Head Constables, waiting to get promotion to
the post of Sub Inspector of Police, Armed Force.
Whereas, as of now, only 309 vacancies are
available. Therefore, after filling up those 309
vacancies, still 1026 personnel since have to be
given promotion equal number of supernumerary
posts in the cadre of Armed Reserve, would be
created by the Government, for which there would
be no financial implication, because these persons
38/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
already are getting salary equal to Sub Inspector of
Police, Armed Reserve, as already they have been
functioning, as Special Sub Inspector of Police,
Armed Reserve.
iv. If these measures are taken, the incumbents, in
the feeder category to getting promotion to the post
of Sub Inspector of Police as well as Inspector of
Police, Armed Reserve, who have, otherwise so
far, not been given promotion, because of adoption
of Range Wise Seniority, would be benefited and
by virtue of these promotions, the already
promoted Sub Inspector of Police as well as
Inspector of Police, based on the Range Wise
Seniority, would not be reverted back and their
salary also would be protected. However, their
inter se seniority would be rearranged on the basis
of State Wide Seniority, reckoning their initial
enlistment as Head Constable, Grade II, for the
purpose of fixing their inter se seniority, based on
which, promotions, in future, would be operated
among Sub Inspector of Police and Inspector of
Police to be promoted. v. With regard to the
promotion to the post of Sub Inspector of Police,
Armed Reserve, as per the sub rule, since only
Range Promotion Board is empowered to make
such promotions, necessary amendments since
39/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
have to be made as a routine subordinate
legislation, so, that would also be taken care of by
the Government and at the earliest possible time,
such an amendment would be made properly in the
relevant rule. However, without waiting for the
amendment to be made for the implementation of
the State Wide Seniority prospectively and
consequent promotions, by creating supernumerary
posts as indicated above, would be immediately
undertaken by the Government.
3. These submissions were made by the learned
Advocate General, after getting necessary
instructions from the Home Department of the
Government of Tamil Nadu and the Director
General Police of Tamil Nadu.
4. We, after having recorded the said submissions
made by the learned Advocate General appearing
for the State, are of the view, that regarding these
measures now have been projected on behalf of the
Government, in order to resolve the tangle,
touching upon in this batch of litigations, which is
a long pending issue, we direct the Secretary to
Government, Home Department, Government of
Tamil Nadu as well as the Director General of
Police, Government of Tamil Nadu, to file a status
report in the form of an affidavit, along with
40/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
necessary annexures, so that the Court can proceed
further and pass suitable orders, considering the
overall factual matrix of the case. For the aforesaid
exercise, the learned Advocate General seeks time
till 24.02.2026.
5. Post the matter on 24.02.2026 at 2.15 p.m."
37. Again the case came up for further hearing on 24.02.2026 where
on the basis of the request made by the learned Advocate General, we
passed the following order :
"Mr.P.S.Raman, learned Advocate General
appearing for the State has submitted that, as per
the earlier order of this Court dated 18.02.2026, the
issue having been considered by the Director
General of Police, some proposal had been
forwarded to the Government which is under
consideration with the Government, where it seems
that, certain clarifications have been sought for by
the Government with regard to financial
implications and after verifying all these aspects, a
clear policy decision for implementation of the
State-wise Seniority at least prospectively as
indicated in the order of the Court dated
18.02.2026 would be taken. In this regard, an
41/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
affidavit would be filed by the Secretary to
Government, Home Department, Government of
Tamil Nadu only indicating in-principle decision
taken by the Government to implement the State-
wise Seniority at least prospectively.
2. For such compliance, since the learned
Advocate General seeks shorter accommodation,
post these matters on 27.02.2026."
38. Then the case came up for further hearing on 03.03.2026. An
affidavit filed on behalf of the State Government by the Additional Chief
Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition, Excise Department, dated
27.02.2026 was filed before us by the learned Advocate General, where
inter alia the following has been stated :
"5. It is also respectfully submitted that the said
promotions to the rank of Sub-Inspectors of Police
(Armed Reserve) and Inspectors of Police (Armed
Reserve) as proposed supra are subject to
following:-
i) The above promotions may be given effect
prospectively to the existing service personnel by
creating the necessary supernumerary posts
immediately, in addition to the arising vacancies in
42/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
the current year. The individuals will not be
entitled to claim any monetary benefits
retrospectively on par with their batchmates /
juniors and also will not be entitled to claim pay
anomalies arising among their batchmates and
juniors
due to promotion under the new method.
ii) Inter-se-seniority among the existing Head
constables / SSIs /SIs those coming under the
criteria (i) above, shall be fixed with respect to the
date of enlistment as Grade -II Police Constable
and with respect to their date of birth among the
particular recruitment batch who were
promoted/upgraded on the due date without any
impediments.
iii) Grade - I Police Constables who were
promoted / upgraded as Head Constables / SSIs as
the case may be belatedly due to ineligibility viz.,
punishment undergone / relinquishment etc., by
them in the post of Grade - 1 Police Constable /
Head Constable will not be considered along with
their batch mates. They will be considered on their
turn.
iv) Juniors who have got their promotion earlier
than their seniors by Range Promotion Board prior
to this proposed inter-se-seniority shall not have
43/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
any right to claim seniority or further promotion
on the basis of their date of promotion as Inspector
of Police (Armed Reserve) or Sub Inspector of
Police (Armed Reserve), as the case may be. The
inter-se-seniority shall be final.
v) The retired Police personnel would not be
entitled to claim any notional promotion, revision
of seniority with retrospective effect on par with
their batchmates / juniors and any consequential
pensionary benefits."
39. On considering the said affidavit, dated 27.02.2026, we have
passed the following order on 03.03.2026 :
"An affidavit has been filed today by the
Additional Chief Secretary to the Government,
Home, Prohibition and Excise Department dated
27.02.2026.
2. Having gone through the same, we find that,
with regard to the prospective State-Wide seniority
to be adopted, for giving promotion to the post of
Sub-Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police not
only to fill up the existing vacancies in these two
categories, but also for all eligible people in the
44/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
feeder category pursuant to such State-Wide
seniority being adopted prospectively, even the
remaining eligible candidates could also be
accommodated by creating supernumerary posts,
was the stand taken before us on the earlier
occasion, which we have recorded in the earlier
orders. However, the affidavit today filed by the
Additional Chief Secretary does not reflect the said
position and is contra to the same.
3. In paragraph 6(i) of the affidavit, it is stated that,
promotions may be given effect prospectively to
the existing service personnel only against the
available vacancies and in future vacancies as and
when arises without reverting the existing
incumbents and the individual is not entitled to
claim any monetary benefits retrospectively on par
with their batchmates.
4. This of the stand taken by the Official
respondents in the said affidavit dated 27.02.2026
does not reflect the earlier stand taken before this
Court to give effect to the State-Wide Seniority
prospectively by filling up the existing vacancies
and also to create supernumerary vacancies for the
purpose of giving promotions to all eligible
candidates pursuant to the State-Wide Seniority,
the incomplete affidavit or the contra affidavit
45/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
filed by the Additional Chief Secretary cannot be
accepted by this Court.
5. In view of the same, time is granted for further
one week to file appropriate affidavit by the
Additional Chief Secretary.
6. Post these matters on 10.03.2026."
40. Again the case came up for further hearing on 01.04.2026, where
after hearing the learned Advocate General and other respective counsel for
the parties, we have passed the following order :
"It is submitted by Mr.P.S.Raman, learned
Advocate General that, in respect of the issue
which has been raised in this batch of cases, that
the State-wide seniority to be provided for the
purpose of promotion to the post of Sub-Inspector
and Inspector of Police, Armed Reserve Wing of
the Tamil Nadu Police Department, could be given
effect to prospectively, by thus, 1000+ such
affected persons could be benefited to get
promotion, has already engaged the consideration
of the Government, where, a Screening Committee
has already been formed and before the Screening
Committee, the issue was placed and discussed.
46/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
2. As the Election Code of Conduct has already
come into effect, since the issue is being seized of
by the Court and already at least two Judicial
orders have been passed by this Court, pursuant to
which, since the orders of this Court has to be
complied with, necessary decision to be taken by
the Screening Committee will be placed before the
Election Commission of India to get their formal
nod and after getting the nod from the Election
Commission of India, an ultimate decision having
been taken or to be taken by the Government in
tune with the orders already been passed by this
Court will be brought to the notice of this Court by
way of filing an affidavit or statement by the
Additional Chief Secretary to the Government,
Home Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, as
well as the Director General of Police,
Government of Tamil Nadu, so that a quietus
could be given in respect of this long pending
issue, hence, the learned Advocate General wants
time till 15.04.2026.
3. Recording the said submission made by the
learned Advocate General appearing for the State,
post these matters for filing the said compliance
report and also to pass further orders on
15.04.2026."
47/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
41. On 20.04.2026, when the cases were taken up for further hearing,
an additional affidavit filed by the Additional Chief Secretary to
Government, Home Department, dated 15.04.2026 was filed by the learned
Advocate General. Considering the same we have passed the following
order on 20.04.2026 :
"2. The learned Advocate General having filed the
further affidavit pursuant to our earlier orders
dated 24.02.2026 and 01.04.2026 by the
Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home,
Prohibition and Excise Department dated
15.04.2026 and relied upon the same would submit
that, in principle, the Government has agreed to
extend the promotion prospectively for those who
are affected because of the District wide Seniority
having been adopted by the Department all these
years to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police and
Inspector of Police.
3. In this context, the following has been stated by
the Home Secretary in the affidavit:
“ 4. With regard to the promotions given to the
constabulary ranks (i.e., Grade-I Police Constable
& Head Constable / Special Sub-Inspector of
Police), it is respectfully submitted that the above
48/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
proposed promotion scheme will not be extended
to the Constabulary ranks and the existing method
of upgradation scheme alone will be continued
based on the seniority within the respective
District / City.
5. It is also respectfully submitted that the said
promotions to the rank of Sub-Inspectors of Police
(Armed Reserve) and Inspectors of Police (Armed
Reserve) as proposed supra are subject to
following:
(i) The above promotions may be given effect
prospectively to the existing service personnel by
creating the necessary supernumerary posts
immediately, in addition to the arising vacancies
in the current year. The individuals will not be
entitled to claim any monetary benefits
retrospectively on par with their batchmates /
juniors and also will not be entitled to claim pay
anomalies arising among their batchmates and
juniors due to promotion under the new method.
(ii) The retired Police personnel would not be
entitled to claim any notional promotion, revision
of seniority with retrospective effect on par with
their batchmates / juniors and any consequential
pensionary benefits.”
4. With regard to the proposal now has come out
49/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
from the Government by way of this affidavit filed
by the Home Secretary, the learned Senior Counsel
and the other counsel appearing for the parties
would submit that, insofar as the prospective
promotion to be extended to the eligible persons
on the basis of the State wide Seniority to the post
of Sub-Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police
(Armed Reserve) is concerned, it must be
calculated from the date of initial enlistment as
Police Constable Grade-II, i.e., Constabulary Stage
and not from any subsequent stage as the very
promotion originally earned, i.e., first promotion
from Grade-II Constable to Grade-I Constable and
from Grade-I Constable to Head Constable, even
in that itself there has been lot of heartburn
because of the adoption of the District Wide
Seniority and therefore, this aspect alone has to be
rectified by the Government.
5. When this has been requested to the learned
Advocate General to clarify, he states that, he
would discuss with the Government and Director
General of Police and would revert back with
further clarificatory affidavit in this regard to
extend the benefit of prospective promotion to the
eligible persons to the post of Sub-Inspector of
Police and Inspector of Police (Armed Reserve)
50/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
from the Constabulary Stage itself and accordingly
such a revised affidavit would be filed, for which,
the learned Advocate General seeks two days time.
6. Post the matter on 22.04.2026."
42. Pursuant to this order, again an additional affidavit was filed
giving complete clarification as to the query raised by the Court by the
Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home, Prohibition and Excise
Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, dated 21.04.2026, which was also
taken into consideration and we have passed the following order on
22.04.2026 :
"Pursuant to our last order dated 20.04.2026,
further clarificatory affidavit has been filed by the
Additional Chief Secretary to Government, Home,
Prohibition and Excise Department dated
21.04.2026, where, inter alia, the following has
been stated:
“ 5. It is also respectfully submitted that the said
promotions to the rank of Sub-Inspectors of Police
(Armed Reserve) and Inspectors of Police (Armed
Reserve) as proposed supra are subject to the
following:- (i) The above promotions may be given
effect prospectively to the existing service
51/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
personnel by creating the necessary
supernumerary posts immediately, in addition to
the arising vacancies in the current year. The
individuals will not be entitled to claim any
monetary benefits retrospectively on par with their
batchmates / juniors and also will not be entitled
to claim pay anomalies arising among their
batchmates and juniors due to promotion under
the new method. (ii) Inter-se-seniority among the
existing Head Constables / SSIs/ SIs those coming
under the criteria (i) above, shall be fixed with
respect to the date of enlistment as Grade-II
Police Constable and with respect to their date of
birth among the particular recruitment batch who
were promoted / upgraded on the due date without
any impediments. (iii)Grade-I Police Constables
who were promoted / upgraded as Head
Constables / SSIs as the case may be belatedly due
to ineligibility viz., punishment undergone /
relinquishment etc., by them in the post of Grade-I
Police Constable / Head Constable will not be
considered along with their batchmates. They will
be considered on their turn. (iv) Juniors who have
got their promotion earlier than their seniors by
Range Promotion Board prior to this proposed
inter-se-seniority shall not have any right to claim
52/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
seniority or further promotion on the basis of their
date of promotion as Inspector of Police (Armed
Reserve) or Sub Inspector of Police (Armed
Reserve) as the case may be. The inter-se-seniority
shall be final. (v) The retired Police personnel
would not be entitled to claim any notional
promotion, revision of seniority with retrospective
effect on par with their batchmates / juniors and
any consequential pensionary benefits.”
2. Relying on these averments, Mr.P.S.Raman,
learned Advocate General made submissions
stating that the Government is committed to follow
what has been stated in earlier affidavits as well as
the present affidavit, especially in the context of
the clarification sought for by this Court in the
earlier orders, the present clarification in paragraph
No.5 of today’s affidavit has been stated, he
contended.
3. The learned Senior Counsel and other learned
counsel appearing for the parties wanted to make
some submissions on this affidavit filed now by
the Home Secretary on behalf of the State of Tamil
Nadu and for the said purpose and to conclude the
hearing, post these matters on 27.04.2026 at 12.00
Noon."
53/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
43. Thereafter on 27.04.2026, further arguments were advanced by
the learned respective counsel appearing for the parties and the learned
counsels as well as the learned Advocate General who has made explicitly
clear the stand of the State Government to implement the State wise
seniority for giving promotion to the police force from Grade II Police
Constable to Grade I Police Constable, Grade I Police Constable to Head
Constable, Head Constable to Sub-Inspector of Police and Sub-Inspector of
Police to Inspector of Police by dispensing with the Range wise seniority
system hitherto adopted by the employer.
44. In view of the said stand taken by the State Government, the issue
raised in this batch of cases could be resolved amicably without affecting
anybody's service prospects.
45. It has been made very clear by the State Governments in these
affidavits which have been quoted herein above that the State wise seniority
would be adopted prospectively, that means the effect of State wise seniority
would be given from 01.01.2026, thereby those who are in service as on
31.12.2025 in various cadre such as Head Constable, Sub-Inspector of
54/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Police and Inspector of Police in all the Ranges would be taken into account,
thereby a combined State wise seniority on the basis of initial enlistment,
i.e., Constabulary stage would be adopted, thereby the seniority would be
rearranged and worked out and on that basis whoever has reached the
position to get such promotion respectively to the post of Sub-Inspector of
Police and Inspector of Police would be considered for such promotion.
46. It is further to be noted that while giving such promotion for want
of vacancies, certain eligible persons could not be given promotion, where
supernumerary posts would be created as a one time measure to
accommodate all those eligible persons and it is further to be noted that by
virtue of these promotions being made on the basis of adoption of State wise
seniority prospectively from 01.01.2026, the promotion already earned by
various incumbents by virtue of the Range wise seniority would not be
reverted. For instance if they already earned the promotion to the post of
Sub-Inspector of Police, he can continue to be the Sub-Inspector of Police.
Like that if he has already earned the promotion to the post of Inspector of
Police, he can continue to be Inspector of Police and either for want of
vacancy or for the accommodation to be made for the seniors by virtue of
55/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
State wise seniority, those promotees already earned would not be disturbed
or reverted.
47. However while making the inter se seniority State wide according
to the eligibility of all such incumbents only on the basis of the enlistment
seniority at the initial stage, i.e., from Constabulary stage, such a seniority
would be rearranged, therefore any further promotion to be earned for any of
these incumbents including the already promotion earned persons, such a
promotion would be made only on the basis of the rearranged seniority from
the stage of Constabulary, i.e., enlistment date. These are all the salient
features under which the State wide seniority is to be adopted by the State
Government prospectively by giving effect to w.e.f. 01.01.2026.
48. It is further to be noted that those who have already retired from
service by 31.12.2025 would not get any benefit either notional seniority or
notional promotion or pay benefits or service benefits. It is in the other
words could be said that, those who are in service as on 01.01.2026 alone
would be considered for such a State wide seniority and consequential
promotion even they would not be entitled to get any retrospective monetary
benefits except the fixation of correct pay on the basis of their actual
56/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
seniority and promotion date which would be notionally made.
49. After hearing the learned Advocate General elaborately on these
aspects and after having gone through the various affidavits and additional
affidavits filed by the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department,
Government of Tamil Nadu as extracted herein above, when this was
specifically asked, all the learned Senior counsel and counsels appearing for
the employees have agreed upon the said proposal mooted by the State
Government and the decision taken by them to adopt the State wide
seniority prospectively from 01.01.2026. Therefore it is a case of win-win
situation, where the Government is not going to loose anything monetarily.
Like that the employees also, i.e., the members of the police force under
various categories as stated supra would get their due share of the benefit of
fixing their seniority as well as the consequential promotion.
50. However one set of incumbents who are very minimum in
numbers, approximately 15 to 20 members who have already earned such
promotion by virtue of the Range wise seniority represented by
Mr.G.Sankaran, learned Senior counsel would contend that by virtue of the
57/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
adoption of the State wide seniority as has been agreed upon by the State
Government and other employees, their position who earned already the
promotion because of the Range wise seniority cannot be distributed, which
means, their seniority also should not be disturbed was the case projected by
him.
51. In this context, he would submit that it is the wisdom of the State
Government to adopt the State wide seniority prospectively, however, till
date the rule since has not been amended on the basis of the rule position
since Range wise seniority was adopted and promotion had been earned by
some of them who are already working in the promotional position are
entitled to maintain their seniority in the promoted post also, thereby while
refixing the State wise seniority in the promotional position, for instance
either in the Sub-Inspector of Police cadre or in the Inspector of Police
cadre, they should be placed above all of them, i.e., above against all those
to be now promoted by virtue of adoption of the of State wide seniority, was
his contention.
52. Only we have to answer to this question alone in this lis as all
58/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
other issues have been agreed upon between the parties.
53. What is the rule which is impugned herein that is rule 3(b)(ii)(b)
has been extracted herein above.
54. Under the said rule, the Range Promotion Board in respect of
various units were entrusted the job of preparing a qualified candidates list
suitable for promotion. As per the rule as of now there are 27 Ranges, so, in
each range there will be a Range Promotion Board which would prepare the
list, based on which promotion would be given. But nowhere in the rule it is
stated that the seniority to be adopted only on the Range wise.
55. In this context, if we look at rule 25 under the heading "Seniority",
it does not speak about the Range wise seniority. Moreover originally the
Range Promotion Boards were entrusted with the job of conducting the
Range Promotion Test to select the suitable candidates fit for promotion in
the particular range.
56. This method of Range Promotion Test has been dispensed with by
59/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
issuance of a Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.1055, Home (Police-III)
Department, dated 01.11.2006. The relevant portion of the G.O is extracted
hereunder :
"3. The Government, after careful examination of
the proposal of the Director-General of Police,
have decided to accept the same. They accordingly
direct that the provision relating to conduct of
Range Promotion Board tests, viz., written test and
viva-voce examination including drill test to Head
Constables / Head Constables (Armed Reserve) for
promotion as Sub-Inspectors of Police / Sub-
Inspectors of Police (Armed Reserve) in rule 3(d)
(iii) of the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu Police
Subordinate Service be deleted. Consequently, the
Government direct that promotions to the Head
Constables / Head Constables (Armed Reserve) as
Sub-Inspectors of Police / Sub-Inspectors of Police
(Armed Reserve) be granted based on seniority and
service records.
4. Necessary amendments to the Special Rules for
the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service will be
issued separately by the Government in the Home
(Police.VI) Department.
(By order of the Governor)"
60/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
57. Therefore from 2006 onwards the Range Promotion Board Test
has been dispensed with. Hence the only job of the Range Promotion Board
is to consolidate the list of members available in various categories in the
police force like Grade II Police Constable, Grade I Police Constable, Head
Constable, Sub-Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police for further
promotion and the promotion would be given as per the rule by the authority
concerned.
58. By virtue of dispensing with the Range Promotion Test itself as a
decision taken by the Government in the year 2006, the intention of the
Government who is the rule making authority was very clear to dilute the
role of the Range Promotion Board. Now it is only on the basis of the
seniority and not on the basis of the merit the promotions are being
operated. Based on the seniority and service records if the list is prepared
Range wise and on that basis if promotions are given, thereby Juniors are
getting promotion in some Ranges and Seniors are stagnated in some
Ranges, because of want of vacancy. This kind of artificial creation of
Range wise seniority and promotion would no way helpful to the police
force and also no way helpful to the employer, i.e., the Police Department of
61/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
the State.
59. It is the wisdom of the State Government to adopt the State wise
seniority instead of Range wise seniority hitherto being followed and this
has come out as a policy decision of the Government and this has been made
explicitly clear by the State Government in filing number of affidavits
before this Court giving a complete clarification about the decision taken by
the Government to adopt State wide seniority by giving such promotions
from 01.01.20206, such a wisdom cannot be questioned by few incumbents
who already earned promotions though they are Juniors, thanks to the Range
wise seniority system adopted by the Government.
60. Merely because they jumped over the seniors or marched over the
seniors and got promotion by adoption of the Range wise seniority, that
cannot be expected to be continued.
61. The very adoption of the Range wise seniority is certainly violates
the service jurisprudence, because it was one selection and recruitment made
by the Recruitment Agency throughout the State based on the overall
vacancies arises in the State and thereby the Police Constables are enlisted
62/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
as Grade II Police Constable. While that being so, only for the
administrative exigencies or a convenience if they are distributed to various
Districts or Ranges, that cannot be the criterion to fix the seniority as the
seniority would be fixed only on the basis of the marks awarded to the
selected candidates by the Recruitment Board or Agency which is the settled
proposition of law.
62. Therefore the artificially created Range wise seniority hitherto
followed by the State Government is a complete deviation of the service
jurisprudence, therefore such method cannot be considered to be a lawful
method to be adopted or to be continued any further.
63. This has been fully understood by the Government, therefore they
wanted to rectify the same and that is why they have come forward to
dispense with or give away the Range wise seniority system hitherto
followed by them and to adopt the State wise seniority system by making
the implementation for those who are in service as on 01.01.2026
prospectively.
64. Therefore in our considered view, the rule 3(b)(ii)(b) has become
63/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
redundant and also otiose as the same cannot be implemented any further.
65. Even in respect of candidates who earned promotion though they
are juniors because of the Range wise seniority those incumbents would not
be disturbed by making any reversion against them. But at the same time
while fixing the State wise seniority from the Constabulary stage, the
earliest enlistment date of Grade II Police Constable for each of the
incumbent alone shall be taken into account, accordingly, various stages of
promotion have to be earned on the basis of the State wise seniority. When
that being the position even in cases where the juniors already earned such
promotion because of Range wise seniority, they cannot claim permanent
seniority over their seniors as the State wide seniority now being adopted by
the Government is from the Constabulary stage. Therefore the said argument
advanced by the learned counsel appearing for some of the parties who got
impleaded and earned promotion though they are juniors to the next higher
category are to be rejected, accordingly, it is rejected.
66. By virtue of this adoption of the State wise seniority if benefits of
promotion are given to the present incumbents, the retired people may come
64/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
in future to agitate the issue claiming any notional benefits. But such kind of
benefits cannot be granted to them as per the decision taken by the
Government and this of their decision is further fortified by the Special Rule
under the definition clause in sub rule 8 of Rule 1 under the heading
"Member of the service", it is made clear that the member of the service
means a person who has been appointed to the service and who has not
retired or resigned, been removed or dismissed, been substantively
transferred or reduced to another service or been discharged otherwise than
for want of a vacancy.
67. Therefore a person who has not retired alone would be considered
as a member of the service who alone would get the benefits now being
extended by virtue of adoption of State wide seniority, therefore the retirees
as on 01.01.2026 would not get any such benefit. However, it is made clear
that those who retired from service after 01.01.2026 certainly would be
entitled to get such a benefit of State wide seniority and consequential
promotion and all other service benefits which are going to be given to the
present incumbents who are in service now.
65/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
68. In support of the decision that has been taken by us in accepting
the proposal submitted by the State Government in adopting the State wide
seniority and by declaring the Rule 3(b)(ii)(b) of Special Rules for Tamil
Nadu Police Subordinate Service as redundant one, we quote some decisions
of the Hon'ble Supreme Court :
1. Minor.P.Rajendran v. State of Madras, AIR 1968 SC 1012
2. Minor A.Peeriakaruppan v. State of Tamil Nadu and Ors., (1971) 1
SCC 38
3. Radhey Shyam Singh v. Union of India, (1997) 1 SCC 60
69. In Radhey Shyam Singh v. Union of India, reported in (1997) 1
SCC 60, in paragraph numbers 8, 9 and 10, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has
held as follows :
"8. It is needless to emphasis that the purpose and
object behind holding a recruitment examination is
to select suitable and best candidates out of the lot
and such an object can only be achieved by
making a common select list of the successful
candidates belonging to all the zones. On the other
hand if zone-wise selection is made then various
candidates who appeared in some of the zones and
66/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
secured more marks than those who are selected
from other zones would be deprived of their
selection resulting into great injustice and
consequent discrimination. Thus there can be said
to exist no nexus between the aforesaid process of
zone-wise selection and the object to be achieved,
that is, the selection of the best candidates. That
being so the process of selection as envisaged in
paragraph 16 of the advertisement in question and
reproduced in the earlier part of this judgment
would lead to discriminatory results because by
adopting the said process of zone-wise selection
would result in the devaluation of merit at the
selection examination by selecting a candidate
having lesser marks over the meritorious candidate
who has secured more marks and consequently the
rule of equal chance for equal marks would be
violated. Such a process would not only be against
the principles enunciated in Article 14 and 16 of
the Constitution but it would also result in heart
burning and frustration amongst the young men of
the country. The rule of equality of opportunity for
every individual in the country is an inalienable
part of our constitutional guarantee and that being
so a candidate who secures more marks than
another is definitely entitled to get preference for
67/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
the job as the merit must be the test when selecting
a candidate for recruitment for the posts which are
advertised. In the present case admittedly the
process of selection as envisaged in paragraph 16
of the advertisement in question is violative of
Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India as it
has been demonstrated from the marks list of the
appellants placed before us at the Bar during the
course of arguments that they had secured more
marks than those secured by some of the selected
candidates.
9. In the case of RajendranVs. State of Madras
&Ors. (1968(2) SCR 786) this Court had struck
down the districtwise distribution of seats for the
medical admission as providing for unitwise
allocation was held to be violative of Article 14
and 16 of the Constitution on the ground that it
might result in candidates of inferior calibre being
selected in one district and those of superior
calibre not being selected in another district.
Similarly in the case of PeeriakaruppanVs State of
Tamil Nadu &Ors. (1971 (2) SCR 430) unit-wise
allocation of seats was also held to be void and
was struck down as discriminatory. Again in the
case of Nidamarti Mahesh Kumar Vs. State of
Maharashtra &Ors. (1986 (2) SCC 534) region-
68/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
wise scheme adopted by the State Government
was held to be void and struck down by this Court
by holding that it would result in denial of equal
opportunity and was thus violative of Article 14 of
the Constitution. The ratio of these decisions of
this Court is fully attracted to the facts of the
present case in which the process of selection on
the zonal basis will also result in denial of equal
opportunity and would be violative of Article 14
and we hold accordingly.
10. The argument advanced by the learned counsel
for the respondents that this process of zone-wise
selection is in vogue since 1975 and has stood the
test of time can not be accepted for the simple
reason that it was never challenged by anybody
and was not subjected to judicial scrutiny at all. If
on judicial scrutiny it cannot stand the test of
reasonableness and constitutionality it cannot be
allowed to continue and has to be struck down.
But we make it clear that this judgment will have
prospective application and whatever selections
and appointments have so far been made in
accordance with the impugned process of selection
shall not be disturbed on the basis of this
judgment. But in future no such selection shall be
made on the zonal basis. If the Government is
69/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
keen to make zone-wise selection after allocating
some posts for each zone it may make such
scheme or rules or adopt such process of selection
which may not clash with the provisions contained
in Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India
having regard to the guidelines laid down by this
Court from time to time in various
pronouncements. In the facts and circumstances of
the case we make no order as to costs. The appeals
and writ petitions are allowed as indicated above."
70. Many number of decisions on this proposition can be quoted :
1. NidamartiMaheshkumar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors., (1986) 2
SCC 534
2. Babita Prasad and Ors., v. State of Bihar and Ors., 1993 Supp (3)
268
3. Unemployed Secondary Grade Teachers Welfare Association v.
State of Tamil Nadu, 2008 (6) MLJ 224
71. Therefore in view of the legal position and also on the basis of the
decision now has been taken by the Government as projected by the learned
Advocate General by relying upon various Affidavits filed on behalf of the
State Government by the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department,
70/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Government of Tamil Nadu, by considering the over all issue, we are
inclined to pass the following orders in this batch of cases :
(i) That Rule 3(b)(ii)(b) of Special Rules for
Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service has
become redundant in view of the decision taken by
the Government to adopt the State wise seniority.
(ii) As decided by the State Government, the
State wise seniority be adopted in finalizing the
inter se seniority among various police personnel
in Armed Reserve Police Force in the State of
Tamil Nadu Police atleast from 1993 Batch as
only those people are still in service from the
Constabulary stage.
(iii) The seniority inter se shall be reckoned
therefore from the date of fixing initial enlistment,
i.e., Grade II Police Constable enlistment of all
these batches from 1993 till date and accordingly
their seniority under various stages be adopted,
accordingly promotion shall be made.
(iv) By virtue of this adoption of State wide
seniority whoever become eligible to get
promotion to various stages like Head Constable,
71/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Sub-Inspector of Police and Inspector of Police,
those incumbents be identified and accordingly on
the basis of their seniority in the State wide
seniority list to be prepared in this regard,
promotion shall immediately be granted to them.
(v) This adoption of State wise seniority
according to the Government decision would be
made prospectively from 01.01.2026. This benefit
would be available to only those who are in
service as on 01.01.2026. In other words those
who retired on or before 31.12.2025 under any
category whether with or without promotion, those
employees / members of the police force would not
get any such benefits by virtue of the State wise
seniority.
(vi) By adopting the Range wise seniority as
per rule 3(b)(ii)(b) if any promotion already been
earned by any individual even they may be Juniors
to some of them, based on the State wise seniority,
shall not be disturbed or be reverted from the
position they already earned.
(vii) But at the same time while finalizing
the State wise seniority in each category from the
72/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
Constabulary stage, the promotees already earned
such promotion by virtue of Range wise seniority
though are not liable to be reverted their seniority
would accordingly be altered if need arises on the
basis of the initial seniority from the Constabulary
stage and accordingly rearranged seniority be
made including those promotees who have already
earned promotion by virtue of Range wise
seniority.
(viii) Since such a State wise seniority and
the consequential promotion being made only
prospectively from 01.01.2026, none of the
beneficiaries would get any backwages or
monetary benefits till 31.12.2025, but at the same,
their pay would be fixed according to their
original seniority from the Constabulary stage and
accordingly the revised pay would be paid
prospectively only from 01.01.2026 and no
arrears or difference of backwages can be claimed
by them as they are not entitled for the same.
(ix) By virtue of the declaration being made
now that the rule 3(b)(ii)(b) having become
redundant by virtue of the policy decision now
taken to adopt the State wise seniority
73/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
prospectively from 01.01.2026, necessary
Government Orders in this regard be issued by the
State Government forthwith.
(x) On issuance of such a Government
Order, bringing the enabling provision in the rule,
i.e., Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Police
Subordinate Service, all these directions be
complied with by adopting the State wise seniority
and the consequential promotions at various
stages.
(xi) This task of preparing the State wise
seniority at various stages / positions or
categories from the Constabulary stage shall be
completed and the list be released within a period
of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
(xii) As per the State wise seniority list to be
released in this regard as indicated above,
necessary promotions be extended to the eligible
candidates as per their seniority which includes
those who are retired or retiring from service on
01.01.2026 and thereafter.
74/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
72. With all these directions, these writ petitions and writ appeals are
disposed of. However there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
73. This Court place on record the appreciation to Mr.P.S.Raman,
learned Advocate General who has used his good office in resolving the
issue with wide consultation with the Government at various stages and by
virtue of that, the long pending issue for several decade in the Tamil Nadu
Police Force especially in the Armed Reserve category are getting resolved.
(R.S.K., J.) (N.S., J.)
27.05.2026
Index : Yes
Speaking Order : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
tsvn
To
1. The Secretary
Government of Tamil Nadu
Home Department
Secretariat, Fort St. George
Chennai – 9.
75/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
2. The Secretary to Government
Home (Pol. II) Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai – 9.
3. The Director General of Police
O/o. The Director General of Police
Post Box No.601, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai
Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.
4. The Additional Director General of Police
Administration,
No.1, Dr.Radhakrishnan Road,
Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
5. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Trichy Range, Trichy District - 620 020.
6. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Coimbatore Range, Coimbatore - 18
7. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Madurai Range, Madurai.
8. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Ramanathapuram Range, Ramanathapuram
9. The Deputy Inspector General of Police
Trichy Range, Trichy District – 620 020
10. The Chairman
Range Promotion Board,
Madurai Range & Superintendent of Police,
Madurai District.
11. The Commissioner of Police
Greater Chennai City,
Veppery, Chennai - 7.
76/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
12. The Commissioner of Police
Avadi City, Chennai.
13. The Commissioner of Police
Tambaram City, Chennai.
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND
N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.
tsvn
Common Order
in
W.P.(MD)Nos.7350, 21789 & 25923 of 2022 &
W.P.(MD)No.17294 of 2020 & W.A.(MD)Nos.1191,
1192 & 1159 to 1165 of 2020 & W.P.Nos.16349
of 2023 & W.P.Nos.14645 & 14646 of 2016 &
W.P.No.20152 of 2020 &W.P.No.21013 of 2024
and W.A.Nos.457 & 459 of 2026
and connected miscellaneous petitions
77/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )

W.P.(MD).No.7350 of 2022 etc., batch
27.05.2026
78/82
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 27/05/2026 03:23:12 pm )