21 Jun 2022
Order issued
ConcludedThe Madras High Court upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.
Disciplinary action · Procedural only.
Source: 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 267
Not yet re-checked.
CW-2022-0011Chennai, Tamil NaduJudgment 21 June 2022
K. Kumaradoss vs The Principal Secretary to Government and Others
The Madras High Court (Justice S. M. Subramaniam) dismissed the writ petition of retired Special Sub-Inspector K. Kumaradoss, upholding the major penalty of pay reduction by three stages for three years with cumulative effect for receiving mamool of Rs 50 twice a week from a bunk-shop owner near a TASMAC shop. The Court held the departmental enquiry's finding of proved corruption charges suffered no perversity and the punishment was not disproportionate. It directed registration of criminal cases wherever mamool receipt by police officials is traced. The appeal and review against the penalty had already failed.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 21 June 2022 in W.P. No. 2507 of 2015, the Madras High Court (Coram: S. M. Subramaniam, J.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the K. Kumaradoss (Special Sub-Inspector).
- Register number
- TN 01 CW 0022
- Case reference
- W.P. No. 2507 of 2015 / 2022 LiveLaw (Mad) 267
- Court and date
- Madras High Court (Coram: S. M. Subramaniam, J.), 21 June 2022
- Officer(s) at the material time
- K. Kumaradoss (Special Sub-Inspector)
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Not stated in the cited sources
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Perusal of the entire findings of the enquiry officer in his report, it is clear that the allegation of receiving mamool by the police officials are established.” (at para 12)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Disciplinary action upheld.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Madras High Court judgment dated 21 June 2022 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Perusal of the entire findings of the enquiry officer in his report, it is clear that the allegation of receiving mamool by the police officials are established.” (para 12)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.