CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has issued statutory notice to Home Secretary (Police-III) Niranjan Mardi and the then DGP, T K Rajendran, on a contempt petition seeking to punish them for not complying its earlier orders. When the matter came up on Thursday, the Additional Advocate General told Justice T Raja that he had filed an appeal and therefore, the matter can be adjourned.

“There is no justification for making such a prayer to defer compliance of the order passed by this court in 2017. Since such a prayer can never be entertained, this court is constrained to issue statutory notice,” the judge said and ordered issuance of statutory notice to the contemnors, returnable by June 17. Originally, seeking continuity of service and pay protection, the petitioners filed a petition. According to R Rajakumar of Nagapattinam and 167 others, all of them joined as Grade-II constables in 2011 in Category- 3, Tamil Nadu Special Police and received two yearly increments in 2012 and 2013. They had been given earned leave, gratuity and other benefits from 2011.

The relevant GO said that if such Grade-II constables work for 10 years in category-3, TSP, then the department itself would transfer them to category-2, Armed Reserve, with continuity of service and pay protection, together, with seniority. While so, the department called for applications from the petitioners for entering into category 3 by way of appearing in the exam. With NOC, the petitioners appeared and got selected. In the notification inviting applications, the department specifically provided a clause, safeguarding their seniority. But after selection and granting two yearly increments up to 2013, they were informed that their seniority could be counted only from 2013 and their basic pay would also start from the same year, only while giving all other benefits with continuity from 2011. Aggrieved, they filed a petition. By an order dated January 10, 2017, the writ petition was allowed and authorities were directed to grant continuity of service with all attendant benefits. This order was not implemented. Contending that it was tantamount to wilful disobedience, the petitioners preferred present contempt petition.