Madras High Court: In a writ petition filed to direct the Director General of Police (‘DGP’) to release the salary and benefits, which has to be paid to the petitioner in the interest of justice, Battu Devanand, J. has held that the DGP has failed to discharge his duty to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner, which is illegal, unjust, arbitrary, irrational and violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Thus, the Court directed the DGP to examine the representation dated 14-12-2019 submitted by the petitioner and take appropriate action within a period of one week from the date of this order.
In the case at hand, the petitioner is the Inspector of Police working in Dharmapuri District. He contended that he has been discharging his duties with great honesty and due to his honesty only, he had been transferred nearly 39 times in his 20 years of service. He further contended that due to some higher official pressure and misadministration, his salary is kept at hold for a long time. He also contended that he had submitted many representations to the administrative department about his pending salary, but no steps have been taken till now.
The Court noted that on 18-03-2020, a notice was ordered to the DGP. Thereafter, this case was not listed till date and no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the DGP. On 21-06-2023, the Court directed the Government Advocate appearing for the DGP to get instructions with regard to the status of the representation dated 14-12-2019 submitted by the petitioner.
The Court said that when an Inspector of Police cadre officer submits a representation to the DGP, who is the head of the Police Department to the State, and if the said representation did not see the light of the day and no action is initiated, it proves how the petitioner is being harassed. If the DGP requires any further information from the petitioner to consider his representation and to pass appropriate orders, it is for him to intimate the same to the petitioner.
The Court further said that this is one of the classic cases of lethargic attitude of the bureaucrats in India. Every employee who discharges his duties honestly 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 the necessities of his family members, from the salary he is getting.
In the present case, the petitioner contended that his wife is suffering from cancer. To which the Court said that, definitely he has to meet her medical expenses. Due to non-payment of salary and non-consideration of his representation for four years all the family members of the petitioner had suffered mentally and financially. Thereby, they are forced to suffer irreparable loss and hardship.
The Court opined that the action of the DGP is not only illegal, unjust and arbitrary, but it is violation of right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
[MA Ranjith v. Director General of Police, 2023 SCC OnLine Mad 4366, Order dated 26-06-2023]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner: Advocate M. Madhu Prakash;
For Respondent: Additional Advocate General M. Kumaresan, Government Advocate P. Vijaya Devi.
Buy Constitution of India HERE
