MADURAI: A petition filed by a police officer, facing an inquiry proceeding, to allow him to seek voluntary retirement from service, was dismissed by the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench).
S Balakrishnan, a Special Sub-Inspector attached to the Kadaladi Police Station in Ramanathapuram district, had in May 2013 submitted an application to the district Superintendent of Police (SP) seeking voluntary retirement from service.
The SP rejected his application citing a pending inquiry against him.
Contending that no departmental or criminal proceedings are pending against him, the petitioner challenged the impugned rejection order issued by the SP.
In his counter affidavit, the SP submitted that when Balakrishnan was posted at the Perunazhi Police Station in May 2008, a mentally challenged person had entered the station premises and damaged certain articles. Balakrishnan and a head constable had pacified him ‘using minimum force’ and handed him over to his father. The following day the man died necessitating an inquiry by the Revenue Divisional Officer. Based on the inquiry report, the government had ordered departmental action against the two policemen in March 2011.
A charge memo was prepared against Balakrishnan and the head constable and a report was sent to the Director General of Police (DGP) in June 2013. The DGP’s order in this regard was awaited.
Petitioner’s counsel argued that under Rule 56(1) (e) of the Fundamental Rules of the Tamil Nadu Government, Balakrishnan was entitled to seek voluntary retirement despite being issued with a charge memo.
Passing orders Justice K Ravichandrabaabu said since departmental action was pending against the petitioner before he had sought voluntary retirement, the petitioner has not satisfied the conditions stipulated under Rule 56(3) (e) of Fundamental Rules. Hence the judge dismissed the petition. However, he directed the concered authorities to complete the proceedings in four months.