Case Note & Summary
These two intra-court writ appeals were filed by the State police authorities (Director General of Police, Commissioner of Police, and Deputy Commissioner of Police) against the common order dated 29.03.2023 passed by a Single Judge of the Madras High Court in W.P.Nos.17080 of 2013 and 36667 of 2016. The writ petitioner, K. Sakthivel, had been appointed as a Syces (horse caretaker) in the Chennai City Police, Mounted Branch, on 29.06.2005, a post created for maintaining horses used for patrol and crowd control at Marina Beach. His services were regularised on 01.07.2008. In 2010, citing medical ailments, he sought an alternate duty, and by proceedings dated 09.06.2010, he was assigned office assistant duties, which he performed until 09.06.2011. Thereafter, he was directed to resume Syces duties, which he did until March 2013 while taking medical leaves. After a medical recommendation for six months’ rest, he applied for and was granted medical leave from 26.03.2013 to 27.09.2013. On 04.05.2013, he submitted a representation requesting alternate duty in view of his health condition, but it was not considered. Subsequently, a charge memo dated 23.05.2016 was issued to him. The petitioner challenged the charge memo and sought a direction for lighter duty by filing the two writ petitions. The Single Judge allowed the writs, quashed the charge memo, and directed the authorities to consider his 40% disability and provide him a job in a lighter post such as Helper or Assistant. Aggrieved by this order, the police authorities filed the present writ appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The appeals were heard and reserved for judgment on 12.02.2025, and the judgment was pronounced on 19.02.2025. The provided text does not contain the court’s final decision or reasoning.
Issue of Consideration
W.A.Nos.1102 and 1173 of 2024
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (02) 72
W.A.Nos.1102 and 1173 of 2024
R. Subramanian, G. Arul Murugan
P. Kumaresan, S. Yashwanth, D. Ashok Kumar, D. Bennington
1. The Director General of Police, Kamaraj Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004; 2. The Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008; 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Armed Force in-charge Motor Vehicles, Pudupet, Chennai - 600 002 [in W.A.No.1102 of 2024]; 1. The Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004; 2. The Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007; 3. The Deputy Commissioner of Police (Administration), Office of Commissioner of Chennai City Police, Vepery, Chennai - 600 007 [in W.A.No.1173 of 2024]
K. Sakthivel, S/o. K. Kuppusamy, 42/56, Thambuchetti Lane, Kalmandapam, Royapuram, Chennai - 600 013
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeals against the common order of the Single Judge in writ petitions.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought to set aside the common order dated 29.03.2023 in W.P.Nos.17080 of 2013 and 36667 of 2016.
Filing Reason
The appellants, police authorities, filed appeals aggrieved by the Single Judge's order quashing a charge memo and directing them to consider the respondent's health condition and provide a lighter duty.
Previous Decisions
The Single Judge by common order dated 29.03.2023 quashed the charge memo dated 23.05.2016 and directed the appellants to consider the writ petitioner's health condition and provide a job in a lighter post such as Helper or Assistant due to his 40% disability.
Judgment Excerpts
the posts of Syces were created for taking care of the horses that were available with the City Police which were used for patrol duties particularly at the Marina Beach for crowd control.
the respondent / writ petitioner was originally selected and appointed as Syces for Chennai City Police, Mounted Branch on 29.06.2005.
Procedural History
The writ petitioner filed W.P.Nos.17080 of 2013 and 36667 of 2016. The Single Judge of the Madras High Court disposed of both writ petitions by common order dated 29.03.2023, quashing the charge memo dated 23.05.2016 and directing the respondents in the writ petitions (appellants herein) to consider the writ petitioner's health condition and provide a lighter duty. The State filed these writ appeals under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The appeals were reserved for judgment on 12.02.2025 and pronounced on 19.02.2025.
