(Prayer:- Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.6533 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.6534 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.6530 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.6537 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.6536 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.6538 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9190 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9196 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9194 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9197 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9198 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9193 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.6531 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9191 of 2017 dated 21.08.2025 on the file of this Court.)

Common Judgment

N. Sathish Kumar, J.

1. All the Writ Appeals have been filed challenging the common order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)Nos.6529 to 6531, 6533, 6534, 6536 to 6538, 9189 to 9191, 9193, 9194 & 9196 to 9198 of 2017, dated 21.08.2025.

2. Since the issue involved in all the Writ Appeals is one and the same, we are inclined to dispose of the same by a common judgment.

3. The Writ Petitioners/appellants have filed two sets of Writ Petitions. In the first set, the Writ Petitioners/appellants have challenged the Government Order issued by the first respondent in G.O.(MS)No. 276, Home (Pol.VIII) Department, dated 01.04.2017. In the second set, they have challenged the consequential order reverting them to a lower post.

4. The following facts, which are necessary for the disposal of these writ appeals, are as follows:

                     4.1. The appellant, viz., D.Ravi in W.A.(MD)Nos.2647 and 2655 of 2025, was appointed as a Police Constable on 01.03.2002. Similarly, the appellant viz., M.Mahendran in W.A.(MD)Nos.2648 and 2661 of 2025 was appointed as a Police Constable on 14.03.2002. The appellant, viz., C.Arul Prakash in W.A.(MD)Nos.2649 and 2658 of 2025 was appointed as Police Constable on 01.03.2002. The appellant viz., S.Ramesh in W.A.(MD)Nos.2650 and 2656 of 2025 was appointed as Police Constable on 01.03.2002. The appellant viz., K.Veeranan in W.A. (MD)Nos.2651 and 2659 of 2025 was appointed as Police Constable on 01.03.2002. The appellant viz., S.Balamurugan in W.A.(MD)No.2653 and 2657 of 2025 was appointed as Police Constable on 14.03.2002. The appellant viz., M.Muthumanikandan in W.A.(MD)Nos.2654 and 2660 of 2025 was appointed as Police Constable on 01.03.2002 and the appellant viz., S.Baskaran in W.A.(MD)Nos.2809 and 2868 of 2025 was appointed as Police Constable on 28.03.2002. Since they were part of the Special Task Force (STF) constituted by the Government to nab the forest brigand Veerappan, they were temporarily promoted as Naik on 11.04.2004, 18.09.2004, 16.09.2004, 11.04.2004, 11.09.2004, 18.09.2004, 16.09.2004 and 11.04.2004 respectively. Later, they were also given temporary promotion as Havildar on 20.09.2004, 20.09.2004, 16.09.2004, 20.09.2004, 20.09.2004, 22.09.2004, 16.09.2004 and 20.09.2004 respectively. The temporary promotion orders clearly indicate that the promotion orders are purely on temporary basis and it was further informed that they will be reverted at any time without notice or without any reasons assigned thereof. These temporary promotions shall not confer any right or merit to further promotion etc., The above promotions are ordered in view of the exigencies to fill up the vacancies arise due to exodus of personnel on transfer from TSP VI Battalion to City/District AR. This temporary promotion shall not confer any right or merit to further promotion etc.

                     4.2. When the matter stood thus, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.1252, Home (Pol.VIII) Department, dated 29.10.2004, granting one stage accelerated promotion to more than 900 police personnel in various ranks in recognition of the courageous act of encounter and killing of notorious forest brigand Veerappan and his gang. Later, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.1396, Home (Pol-IA) Department, dated 03.10.2007, clarifying the position that accelerated promotion is not extended to accelerate seniority and indicated that the seniority between the accelerated promottees and the general promottees in the promoted category shall continue to be governed by their panel position ie., with reference to their inter-se seniority in the lower grade. At no stage shall accelerated promotion confer accelerated consequential seniority on an individual, since such promotion is only for one stage.

                     4.3. In the meanwhile, pursuant to the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.1252, Home (Pol.VIII) Department, dated 29.10.2004, the appellants were granted accelerated promotion and promoted as Sub- Inspector of Police. Later, the Government passed G.O. Ms. No. 959, Home Department, dated 10.11.2009, reverting all the appellants to the rank of Naik, as their substantive post was that of Police Constable and they were officiating as Naik and Havildar only on a temporary basis at the time of grant of accelerated promotion. The said Government Order was challenged in W.P.Nos.25067 and 25069 of 2009. This Court while setting aside the order of reversion by order dated 14.03.2016, directed the authorities to consider the case of the appellants, after issuing notice to all the parties concerned and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. Later, explanation was called for and Government Order was passed in G.O.Ms.No.276, Home (Pol.VIII) Department, dated 01.04.2017, reverting the appellants to the rank of Naik. The said Government Order and the consequential reversion orders have been challenged in the above Writ Petitions.

                     4.4. The learned Single Judge, after hearing both sides, has dismissed the Writ Petitions. Challenging the same, the appellants have preferred all the Writ Appeals.

5. The main contention raised by the learned Senior Counsel and the learned counsel appearing for the appellants is that the appellants had already been promoted to the cadre of Naik and Havildar when the accelerated promotion was granted under G.O.Ms.No.1252, Home (Pol. VIII) Department, dated 29.10.2004. Therefore, the question of reverting them would not arise at all, and once they had been granted promotion on a temporary basis, they cannot be reverted. The accelerated promotion was granted from their respective ranks in terms of G.O. Ms. No. 1252, Home (Pol. VIII) Department, dated 29.10.2004. Hence, it is contended that once promotion had already been granted, the reversion order is unsustainable. It is further submitted that the appellants have been drawing the salary of Sub-Inspectors of Police all along, and the same cannot now be withdrawn, as the promotions were granted by the Government and not on account of any fault on the part of the appellants.

6. Whereas the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondents would submit that accelerated promotion is intended to be granted only from the substantive post. The appellants were given only temporary promotions in the Battalion due to an emergent situation. As per the Rule 7(iii)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, a member temporarily promoted under item (i)(a) shall whether or not he possesses the qualification prescribed for the service, class or category to which he is promoted, be replaced as soon as possible, by the member of the service who is entitled to the promotion under these rules, if available. Further, it is also stated that if such a person is subsequently promoted to to the higher category in accordance with the rules, he shall commence his probation, if any, in such category from the date of such subsequent promotions or from such earlier date as the appointing authority may determine. Therefore, according to him, when a person was not holding a substantive post at the time of grant of accelerated promotion, he cannot claim accelerated seniority.

                     6.1. Further, it is the contention of the learned Additional Advocate General that, as per Rule 14 of the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, a Police Constable must have completed two years of service to be eligible for promotion as Naik. Similarly, for promotion from Naik to Havildar, one must be an approved probationer in the cadre of Naik. The appellants were not qualified to be promoted as Havildar at the relevant point of time, though they were given temporary promotions in the Battalion. Therefore, since the appellants were not promoted in accordance with the rules, they should be regularised as Naik only with effect from 18.03.2005, after completion of the probation period of one year.

                     6.2. It is further submitted that, under Rule 14 of the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, the date on which a candidate must possess the prescribed qualification for appointment to the post shall be 31st December, and the date on which the approved list shall be communicated shall be 18th March. Thereafter, the appellants were regularised as Havildar on 18.03.2007 in accordance with the Rules. Therefore, according to him, the appellants would be eligible for regular promotion as Sub-Inspectors of Police only from 23.05.2023. The accelerated promotion granted earlier, having been made by mistake, cannot be taken advantage of by the appellants.

7. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the entire materials available on record.

8. The question involved in all these appeals is as to the date on which the appellants are entitled to accelerated promotion.

9. It is not in dispute that the appellants were originally appointed as Constables in the year 2002 on various dates, as stated above. They were promoted as Naik on 11.04.2004, 18.09.2004, 16.09.2004, 11.04.2004, 11.09.2004, 18.09.2004, 16.09.2004, and 11.04.2004, respectively. Thereafter, within a short span of about five months, they were promoted as Havildar on a temporary basis. It is relevant to note that even at the time of promoting the appellants on temporary basis, it was clearly indicated that the promotions are purely on temporary basis and the same will not confer any right or merit to further promotion etc. It was further informed that their promotions are ordered in view of the exigencies to fill up the vacancies arise due to exodus of personnel on transfer from TSP VI Battalion to City/District AR and this temporary promotion shall not confer any right or merit to further promotion etc.

10. It is relevant to extract Rule 7(b)(iii) of sub-clauses (c), (e) and (f) of the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, which read as follows:

                     “.......

                     (c) A member temporarily promoted under item (i) of sub-clause (a) shall, whether or not he possesses the qualifications prescribed for the service, class or category to which he is promoted, be replaced as soon as possible, by the member of the service who is entitled to the promotion under these rules, if available.

                     .......

                     (e) A member promoted under sub-clause (a), (b) or (d) shall not be regarded as a probationer in the higher category or be entitled by that reason of such promotion to any preferential claim on future promotion to such higher category. The services of member promoted under sub-clause (a), (b) or (d) shall be liable to be terminated by the appointing authority at any time without notice and without any reason being assigned.

                     (f) If such a person is subsequently promoted to the higher category in accordance with the rules, he shall commence his probation, if any, in such category form the date of such subsequent promotions or from such earlier date as the appointing authority may determine. He shall also be eligible to draw increments in the time scale of pay applicable to him from the date of commencement of his probation, but shall not be entitled to arrears of pay unless otherwise ordered by the State Government.”

11. The above Rules make it clear that a temporary appointment shall be replaced, as soon as possible, by a member of the service who is entitled to promotion under these rules, if available. It is further stated that if such a person is subsequently promoted to the higher category in accordance with the rules, he shall commence his probation. Further, as per Rule 7(b)(ii)(a) of Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rule, 1978, the following criteria have been prescribed for the promotion of Naik and Havildar in Tamil Nadu Special Police:

                     “i. Should be completed two years of service in the rank of Gr II PC for Naik promotion

                     ii. Should be completed two years of service in the rank of Naik for Havildar promotion.

                     iii. Completion of probation in the rank of Grade~II PC for Naik promotion

                     iv. Completion of probation in the rank of Naik for Havildar promotion

                     v. No charges pending (or) under contemplation against him.

                     i. Should be completed Small Arms Cadre Course in the rank of Naik for Havildar promotion.

12. Therefore, on a combined reading of the rules governing temporary appointments and the original promotion rules, it is evident that for promotion as Naik, a candidate must have completed two years of service in the rank of Grade II Police Constable, and for promotion as Havildar, he must be an approved probationer in the cadre of Naik. However, the appellants were promoted as Havildar from Naik within a short span, immediately after their temporary promotion and without being approved probationers, which is contrary to the rules. Therefore, merely because accelerated promotions were mistakenly granted, the appellants cannot now contend that they are entitled to seniority on that basis. Consequently, they were rightly reverted. Accelerated promotion is, in fact, intended to be granted only against a substantive vacancy.

13. It is relevant to note that the one-year probation period in the cadre of Havildar would fall in the month of September. As per Rule 7(aaa)(iia)(i), the date on which a candidate must possess the prescribed qualification for appointment to the post under Rule 14 of the Special Rules shall be 31st December. Therefore, the said Rule makes it clear that the panel date is 31st December and the approved list is to be communicated on 18th March. In such cases, as rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, the panel date and the date of approval of the list is 18th March. The substantive vacancy for Havildar would have arisen only in 2023 for promotion as Sub-Inspector. Though the appellants were already appointed as Sub-Inspectors and are even now serving in that cadre, the learned Additional Advocate General fairly submitted that they would not be reverted. In this regard, a statement was also made before this Court by the learned Additional Advocate General as early as on 16.09.2025, when this Court granted an interim order, clarifying that the appellants shall not be disturbed from their positions as Sub-Inspectors of Police. Therefore, the State has now taken a stand that since the appellants are working as Sub-Inspectors of Police and are eligible for regular promotion as Sub-Inspectors of Police only from 23.05.2023, and as they are already functioning in that post, their position shall not be reverted.

14. It is well settled that accelerated promotion is meant only for one-stage promotion. Based on such accelerated promotion, the promotees are not entitled to accelerated consequential seniority. The settled position of law is that accelerated promotion is only a one-stage benefit and does not confer accelerated seniority. Seniority has to be determined on the basis of the original batch.

15. In such view of the matter, the contentions raised by the appellants that they are entitled to seniority will not hold good in the eye of law. It is now also submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants that, even assuming the appellants were granted promotion mistakenly, the error was on the part of the Government and not the fault of the appellants. Therefore, all the benefits derived by the appellants shall also be protected, as they have not committed any mistake.

16. Considering the above, we are of the view that since the promotion was wrongly granted by the State pursuant to G.O.Ms.No. 1252, Home (Pol. VIII) Department, dated 29.10.2004, and as the appellants had also participated in risk operations, braving their lives as part of the Special Task Force in the eradication of the forest brigand Veerappan, who caused extensive damage to the ecosystem and wildlife, all the benefits derived by the appellants during their service as Sub- Inspectors of Police from the date of their promotion shall not be recovered by the State.

17. With the above observations, all these Writ Appeals are disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.