2026:MHC:2567 WA No. 1723 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 03-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR WA No. 1723 of 2026 S.Bhuvaneshwari W/o. K.Sivakumar, No.28, Annai Indira Nagar, Annex- 6, Thiruninravur, Chennai - 602024. ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. The Director General of Police No.27VH 776, D.G.P. Office, Kailasapuram, Mylapore, Chennai – 600005. 2. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Police, No.132, EVP Sampath Road, Vepery, Periamet, Chennai-600 007. 3. The Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Old COP Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. ..Respondent(s) Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the orde r of the learned Judge passed in WP No.17472 of 2023 dated https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2026:MHC:2567 WA No. 1723 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 6 04-03-2025 For Appellant(s): Ms.Karthikaa Ashok For Respondent(s): Dr.R.Gouri, Government Counsel for R1 & R2 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The writ order dated 04.03.2025 passed in W.P.No.17472 of 2023 is under challenge in the present intra Court Appeal. Writ petitioner is the appellant. The relief sought for by the appellant is to consider her appointment to the post of Sub Inspector of Police under 10% quota under wards and dependants of the existing police personnel as per Government policy. The policy to provide 10% quota to wards to the existing police personnel is in force. The appellant participated in the process of selection in the year 2001-2002 and 2006. However, she was not selected. She made a representation and thereafter, filed a writ petition before this Court. Since the writ petition was dismissed, the appellant herein filed W.A.No.1551 of 2015 along with other appellants. ,The Division Bench of this Court, dismissed the writ appeal on 27.07.2017 and made an observation as under: It appears that the appellant/writ petitioner is shown to have applied under the wards quota for https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2026:MHC:2567 WA No. 1723 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 6 selection to the post of Sub Inspector of Police during the year 2001. It also appears that the claim of wards quota has not been considered by the selection committee on account of the Government Order being issued in that regard. The learned single Judge, while considering the case of the appellant/writ petitioner, has rejected her request holding that she was not eligible to be appointed under the BC category of which she belongs to, for not securing the cut-off mark of 50. In this regard, the learned single Judge has also observed that on an earlier occasion, when a direction was issued to the State to consider the legality of the 10% reservation in the writ petition filed by a similarly placed person, the State has approached the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court also has set aside the said direction. As a matter of fact, at the relevant point of time, the appointments were made/ filled up form the open quota and the 10% reservation vacancy was not implemented as per the Government Order. Now at this stage, the appellant cannot reiterate that she should have been considered under the wards quota. Even otherwise, the appellant cannot contend that had she been considered under the wards quota she would have been selected, on ifs and buts. Hence, we do not find Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge. Accordingly, the writ appeals are dismissed. No costs. “ Thereafter, the appellant made further representation and the said representation was disposed of by the Director General of Police vide https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2026:MHC:2567 WA No. 1723 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 6 endorsement dated 29.03.2023 which came to be challenged by way of another round of litigation in W.P.No.17472 of 2023. An attempt has been made to re-adjudicate the issue which was already adjudicated by the Division Bench of this Court. Thus, the present petition is to be treated as vexatious. Once the Division Bench has decided the issue and after a lapse of about 5 years, another representation was submitted on 01.03.2023 which was responded by the Director General of Police by giving a reply that the appellant is not eligible under the wards quota. Thus, the present writ petition is rightly rejected by the Writ Court. Consequently, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 03-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No VSI To 1. The Director General of Police No.27VH 776, D.G.P. Office, Kailasapuram, Mylapore, Chennai – 600005. 2. The Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai Police, No.132, EVP Sampath Road, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2026:MHC:2567 WA No. 1723 of 2026 __________ Page5 of 6 Vepery, Periamet, Chennai-600 007. 3. The Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board, Old COP Office Campus, Pantheon Road, Egmore, Chennai-600 008. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2026:MHC:2567 WA No. 1723 of 2026 __________ Page6 of 6 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND N.SENTHILKUMAR, J. vsi WA No. 1723 of 2026 03-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis