WA No. 971 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR WA No. 971 of 2026 S. Sugumar Ex Constable No.015032927, S/o. Sundaram, Budhar Nagar Kilachur Street, Pallikonda, Vellore District - 635 809. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. The Director General Of Police Central Reserve Police Force, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 003. 2. The Deputy Inspector General of Police Central Reserve Police Force, Group Centre, Avadi, Chennai - 065. 3. The Commandant Central Reserve Police Force, 18th Battalion, Kulgam, Jammu and Kashmir C/o.56 ..Respondent(s) WA No. 971 of 2026 Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the Order dated 16.08.2024 made in WP.No.1789 of 2012 and the respondents https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA No. 971 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 5 to take the petitioner into strength of CRPF with continuity of service and all monetary benefits and thus render justice. WA No. 971 of 2026 For Appellant(s): Mr.K.Sivakumar For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Chandrasekaran, Senior Panel Counsel for R1 to R3 Judgment (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present intra-Court Appeal has been instituted challenging the writ order dated 16.08.2024 passed in W.P.No.1789 of 2012. 2. The writ petitioner is the appellant before this Court. Challenging the order of removal from service, the writ petition came to be instituted. Admittedly, the department enquiry was conducted by following the procedures and in compliance with the rules of natural justice. 3. The appellant, who was holding the post of Constable, habitually overstayed after availing the permissible leave under the rules. The authorities, on earlier occasion had taken a lenient view and permitted the appellant to rejoin duty after overstaying. However, on six occasions, the appellant overstayed and thereafter, the authorities have taken a serious view and imposed penalty of removal from service. The respondents found that the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA No. 971 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 5 appellant has habitually overstayed and therefore, the writ court also has taken a view that the appellant is not entitled for any relief. The findings of the writ court is based on the established principles of law and by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. Thus, this Court is not inclined to entertain the Writ Appeal. Consequently, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 01-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No VSI To 1. The Director General Of Police Central Reserve Police Force, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 600003. 2. The Deputy Inspector General of Police Central Reserve Police Force, Group Centre, Avadi, Chennai - 600065. 3. The Commandant Central Reserve Police Force, 18th Battalion, Kulgam, Jammu and Kashmir C/o.56 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA No. 971 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 5 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND N.SENTHILKUMAR J. vsi WA No. 971 of 2026 01-06-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA No. 971 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis