Madras High Court tells Tamil Nadu home department to make changes

Chennai: Pointing out that in view of the non-amendment of the special rules for promotion in the police department, even after the adoption of the new pattern 10+2+3, has given room to favour the favoured few, the Madras high court has directed the state home department to make necessary amendments in the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, which stipulated that a person is eligible for promotion unless he is the holder of SSLC eligible for college study (i.e.old pattern 11+1+3).

A division bench comprising Justices Huluvadi G. Ramesh and RMT. Teeka Raman gave the directive while dismissing an appeal from the home department and DGP, challenging an order of a single judge, which quashed an order of DGP, denying promotion to C. Pichandi, an inspector of police on the ground that he has not passed the old pattern SSLC.

 The bench said, “We concur with the findings of the single judge as to the issue of educational qualification which remains to be stated that the old pattern, namely 11+1+3 has been abolished and new educational pattern, namely 10+2+3 was introduced in the year 1978 and the petitioner entered into the service as Gr.III police constable in TSP-II Battalion, Avadi on September 15, 1981, and subsequently obtained two promotions”.

  The state seems to have granted exemption and promotion to Ulaganathan and Ganesan, while it comes to the case of Pichandi, it has been put against him and “hence, this court finds that in view of the non-amendment of the sub-rules even after the adoption of the new pattern in 10+2+3 which has given room to favour the favoured few and hence, while we concur with the findings of the single judge regarding the educational qualification, fit for promotion of Pichandi, we also observe that it is for the home department to make necessary amendment to the said Rules at the earliest and the law secretary is hereby required to look into the redundant Rules have been duly corrected and updated due to change in education pattern adopted, for nearly 4 decades ago”, the bench added.