30 Jun 2023 7:35 AM GMT
While providing relief to a Police Inspector with respect to his pending salary, the Madras High Court criticized the Director General of Police for not considering the representation made by him in 2019. “This is one of the classic cases of lethargic attitude of the bureaucrats in our country. Every employee, who discharges his duties honestly, he would expect payment of...
While providing relief to a Police Inspector with respect to his pending salary, the Madras High Court criticized the Director General of Police for not considering the representation made by him in 2019.
“This is one of the classic cases of lethargic attitude of the bureaucrats in our country. Every employee, who discharges his duties honestly, he would expect payment of his salary regularly from the employer, without any unreasonable delay. The employee has to survive himself and he has to feed his family and also to take care of all necessities of his family members, from the salary, he is getting,” the court said.
Justice Battu Devanand also said that the action of the DGP is not only illegal but also in violation of the Inspector’s right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
“As such, this Court has no hesitation to hold that the respondent has failed to discharge his duty to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 14.12.2019, which is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, irrational and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the court observed.
The petitioner, MA Ranjith told the court that he has been in service for 20 years and discharging duties with great honesty. He submitted that due to his honesty itself, he has been transferred nearly 39 times. He claimed that due to some higher official pressure and misadministration, his salary has been kept on hold for a long time.
He also informed the court that though he had submitted many representations to the administrative department, no action has been taken. The court was also told that his wife is suffering from cancer and he has to take care of her medical expenses and also his two children education.
The court noted that in the present case, though notice was ordered in March 2020, no counter-affidavit was filed. The court on June 21 had directed the Government Advocate to get instructions with regard to the status of the representation filed by Ranjith.
Upon perusing the status report filed by the Additional Advocate General, the court found that though some reasons were mentioned, the same seemed to have been invented to file the status report and that the representation had not been disposed of by the DGP.
“When an Inspector of Police cadre officer submits a representation to the Director General of Police, who is the head of the Police Department to the State, if the said representation did not see the light of the day and no action is initiated, it itself proves how the petitioner is being harassed. If the respondent requires any further information from the petitioner to consider his representation and to pass appropriate orders, it is for the respondent to intimate the same to the petitioner. Admittedly, such intimation is not issued to the petitioner by the respondent,” the court observed.
The court allowed the petition and directed the DGP to take appropriate action within a week.
"In the present case, as the petitioner contends that his wife is suffering from cancer, definitely, he has to meet her medical expenses. Due to non-payment of salary and non-consideration of his representation for four years i.e., from the year 2019, all the members of the family of the petitioner had suffered mentally and financially. Thereby, they are forced to suffer irreparable loss and hardships," said the court.
Case Title: MA Ranjith v The Director General of Police
Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 179
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.M.Madhuprakash
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr.M.Kumaresan Additional Advocate General VII Assisted by Mrs.P.Vijaya Devi Government Advocate