LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/r-ranjith-singh-ors-vs-the-state-of-tamil-nadu-ors-20250501/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Civil · Reportable judgment

R. Ranjith Singh & Ors. vs The State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
1 May 2025
Case No.
Civil Appeal No(s). 6305-6306 of 2025
Result
Disposed
Bench
B.V. Nagarathna, Satish Chandra Sharma
Citation
[2025] 5 S.C.R. 1778 : 2025 INSC 612
Acts & Sections
Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service… Tamil Nadu District Police Act, 1859 Chennai City Police Act, 1888 Constitution
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 5 S.C.R. 1778 : 2025 INSC 612
Issue for consideration
The dispute involved in the present case is fixation of inter se seniority in respect of direct recruitment which includes some in-service candidates also recruited under the direct recruitment quota.
Headnote

Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1955 – R.25 – Direct recruitment – Sub-Inspectors of Police – The facts of the case reveal that the constables working in the police department were given 20% of the vacancies to compete under the direct recruitment quota and they were to be given seniority over and above the other 80% remaining constables recruited through open market – The State Government for the first time published the G.O. dated 21.11.2017 in the official Gazette and also amended the recruitment rules – The State Government not only granted en bloc seniority to the 20% in-service candidates who were appointed under the direct recruitment quota over and above the open candidates appointed to service through open market but the rule was given effect to with retrospective effect i.e. with effect from 13.07.1995 – Writ Petitions – The High Court upheld the G.O. dated 21.11.2017 – Correctness:

Read the full headnote (2 more paragraphs)

Held: In respect of fixation of seniority of direct recruitments, the unamended rule i.e. Rule 25 was very clear which provided for fixation of seniority with reference to the rank assigned by the appointing authority in the list of selected candidates – It is unfortunate that the State Government has amended Rule 25 by G.O. dated 21.11.2017 by giving it retrospective effect i.e. with effect from 13.07.1995 – The State Government has certainly issued various executive directions from time to time for appointment under the direct recruitment quota providing reservation to in-service candidates to the extent of 20%; however, the rules were never amended till 21.11.2017 – It is a well settled proposition of law that executive instructions cannot supplant the statutory rules – In the present case, the executive instructions issued from time to time have in fact supplanted the statutory rules and such a process is unheard of in the field of service jurisprudence – In the considered opinion of this Court, the amendment to the recruitment rules in the year 2017 to the extent it provides for 20% reservation under the direct recruitment category to the inservice candidates, does not warrant any interference – However, the amendment brought vide G.O. dated 21.11.2017 amending Rule 25(a) of the 1955 Rules, which provides for grant of seniority to all in-service candidates over and above candidates recruited from the open market is certainly violative of Arts. 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and deserves to be struck down by this Court – Further, the action of the State Government in amending the recruitment rules with retrospective effect is certainly violative of Arts.14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India – A statute which takes away the right of an individual with retrospective effect deserves to be set aside by this Court – All seniority list(s) right from 1995 deserve to be recasted by assigning proper seniority to the candidates who have been appointed from the open market as well as from in-service candidates solely on the basis of ranks assigned to the selected candidates by the appointing authority on the basis of marks obtained by them in the examination on the basis of which they have been selected and appointed to the post of Sub-Inspector of Police – Resultantly, the GO dated 21.11.2017 is quashed and amendment to Rule 25 sub rule (a) also is hereby struck down. [Paras 19, 22, 23, 27, 28]

Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1955 – Direct recruitment – Sub-Inspectors of Police – The GO dated 21.11.2017 which grants seniority to the departmental candidates over and above the candidates who have been recruited from open market is hereby quashed and amendment to Rule 25 sub rule (a) also is hereby struck down being violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India – Directions issued. [Para 28]

Keywords: Fixation of inter se seniority · Direct recruitment · In-service candidates · Direct recruitment quota · Seniority of sub-inspectors of police selected from constabulary services · Sub-Inspectors of Police selected from open market · Fixation of seniority of direct recruitments · Retrospective effect · Appointment under the direct recruitment quota · Reservation to in-service candidates · Executive instructions cannot supplant the statutory rules · Candidates recruited from the open market

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Judgment Satish Chandra Sharma, J. 1. Leave Granted. 2. The present appeals are arising out of common judgment dated 08.01.2020 passed in Writ Petition No. 25263/2009 and Writ Petition No. 33544/2018 by High Court of Judicature at Madras, which relates to disputes concerning seniority in the cadre of Sub-Inspector of Police in the State of Tamil Nadu. 3. The undisputed facts of the case reveal that the appellants before this Court were appointed as Sub-Inspectors of Police through a process of selection, keeping in view Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referre
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →