ORDER : Heard Mr.Sakthi Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Veera Kathiravan, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents and carefully perused the materials available on record. 2. This writ petition is filed by a Head Constable working in the Tamilnadu State Police Force seeking issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondent to properly implement the Government Orders in G.O(Ms.)No.469 dated 03.11.2021 and G.O.(Ms.)No.421 dated 08.08.2022 to avail one day compulsory weekly off by considering the petitioner's representation dated 03.03.2024 and permit to take one day weekly off by the petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated time in the interest of justice. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: (i) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the police personnel discharged their duty round the clock on all days of the week. It has been affecting them physically and mentally, since they performed duty without any rest. They are suffering with a lot of stress and strain, which some times lead to depression. Besides this, they are not able to spend quality time with the family members. They are unable to attend the family functions also. Due to this, some time, the general public, who approached the police suffered a lot because of the rough handling of the police. In order to take care of their health and to spend time with their family members, compulsory weekly off is required. (ii) Considering the difficulties being faced by the police personnel, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of State of Tamil Nadu has made an announcement in the floor of the Legislative Assembly on 13.09.2021 by granting weekly off to the police personnel upto the level of Head Constable. Following the announcement of the Hon'ble Chief Minister in the house, the State Government has issued orders in G.O.(Ms.)No. 469, Home (Police-IX) Department 03.11.2021 for amendment to the Police Standing Order 243 (1) The said amendment is extracted herein under: All Police personnel upto the rank of Head Constable shall have five working days, for working on the sixth day in case of existence for which extra time remuneration will be given and on-day compulsory off in each calender week. The schedule of weekly-off duty for the Police Personnel shall be drawn in advance and pasted in the Notice Board of the Police Station/Unit. The schedule of weekly-off duty for the Police Personnel shall be drawn in advance and pasted in the Notice Board of the Police Station/Unit. This will be liable to alteration should it be found later that a particular Head Constable or Police Constable is required for a particular duty on his off-duty day. That Head Constable or Police Constable will then be given the day off- duty on the day preceding or following his allotted day and a Head Constable or Police Constable due for off-duty on that day will be inter-changed” ''If, in the Public Interest, any Head Constable or Police Constable, is not given a day off-duty in any week, he shall be granted Compensatory off on some other day''. (iii) The said Government Orders and amendment to the Police Standing Orders are communicated by the respondent to all concerned officials for taking necessary action. (iv) Thereafter, the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu has also made an announcement on 10.05.2022 to grant weekly off to the Sub-Inspectors and Special Sub-Inspectors of police. Accordingly, the State Government issued orders in G.O.(Ms.)No. 421, Home Police XI Department dated 08.08.2022 sanctioning one day off for every 15 days to the Sub-Inspectors and Special Sub-Inspectors of police and necessary amendments are made to the Police Standing Orders 243(1) and 243(5). 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after issuing specific instructions to all the concerned officers in the Police Department in the State of Tamil Nadu, the said orders are not properly implemented so far. It is his specific case that he was denied one day weekly off many times. Due to the denial of weekly off, the petitioner has suffered a lot. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that around 1,20,000 police personnel in the cadre of Constable and Head Constable are working in the State of Tamil Nadu. Almost, all of them are facing the same problem for denial of weekly off even after specific orders issued by the State Government basing on the announcement of the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. In view of the same, requesting to implement the orders issued by the State Government to grant weekly off to the police personnel, including him, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 03.03.2024 to the respondent. In view of the same, requesting to implement the orders issued by the State Government to grant weekly off to the police personnel, including him, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 03.03.2024 to the respondent. But the petitioner could not get any information as to whether the said representation is considered or not. Under these circumstances, seeking a direction to the respondent for proper implementation of the Government Orders in G.O(Ms.)No.469 dated 03.11.2021 and G.O.(Ms.)No.421 dated 08.08.2022, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court, by filing this writ petition. 6. The issue involved in this writ petition relates not only to one individual's health and quality of life, but also relates to thousands of police personnel's health and quality of life. Considering the importance of the issue involved in this writ petition, this Court sought response of the respondent in writing for early disposal of this writ petition. 7. Accordingly, the respondent placed written instructions through the Additional Government Pleader before this Court. In the said written instructions, the respondent admitted the announcement made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu on 13.09.2021 and 10.05.2022 and issuance of G.O(Ms.)No.469 dated 3.11.2021 and G.O.(Ms.)No.421 dated 8.8.2022 and making amendments to the Police Standing Orders 243(1) and 243(5). 8. It is further stated by the respondent that as on date, in all Districts, Cities and Tamil Nadu Special Police Battalions weekly/ Fortnightly off as per eligibility is being given. The relevant paragraphs in the said written instructions are extracted herein under : ''7. Thus, as on date in all districts, cities and Tamil Nadu Special Police Battalions weekly/Fortnightly off as per eligibility is being given. However, in case of exceptional circumstances like major law and order bandobust, major temple/church festivals or constitutional dignitaries visiting the area, et., where mobilisation of large number of Police personnel is required the weekly/fornightly off is withheld. All the supervising officers have been instructed to ensure that compensatory off is given to such persons on some other day. 8.Apart from the above facts, the petitioner is sanctioned with weekly off periodically by following the G.O.(Ms.)No.469, Home Police -IX Department, dated 03.11.2021. However, the averments in the writ petition shows that the writ petition is being filed for other Police Personnel and for their benefits. It is well settled in service law that in service matters, writ petition cannot be entertained as Public Interest Litigation. However, the averments in the writ petition shows that the writ petition is being filed for other Police Personnel and for their benefits. It is well settled in service law that in service matters, writ petition cannot be entertained as Public Interest Litigation. 9) If any of the individual grievance of the department brought to knowledge of the Superior Officers concerned, the same will be redressed by following the above Government orders. In fact, every week mostly on Tuesday the grievance of the police personnel is being heard by the District Superintendent of Police and Commissioner of Police in Cities. Therefore, the health and quality of life of the Police Personnel is being taken care properly by granting weekly off to the Police Personnel the work life balance is also properly protected''. 9. In the written instructions of the respondent, it is contended that the petitioner is sanctioned with weekly off periodically. But, to establish the same, no particulars are furnished. As such, such vague statement cannot be taken into consideration by this Court. 10. It is the contention of the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent that the averments in the writ petition would show that the petitioner filed the present writ petition raising the grievances of other police personnel and for their benefits and as such, the present writ petition has to be treated as a petition filed under Public Interest Litigation. He further contends that it is well settled law that a writ petition filed as Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable in service matters. To substantiate his contention, learned Additional Advocate General has placed reliance on the following two judgments: i) Dr. Duryodhan Sahu and others Vs. Jitendra Kumar Mishra and others reported in (1998) 7 SCC 273 ; and ii) An unreported judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in WA(MD)Nos.307, 311 and 356 of 2022 dated 28.04.2022 11. This Court carefully perused the said decisions relied on by the learned Additional Advocate General. Though there is no dispute with regard to the proposition of law in the said judgments, in our considered view, the facts and circumstances in the present case are entirely different from the decisions cited supra. 12. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is denied weekly off on several times contrary to the Government Orders. 12. It is the specific contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is denied weekly off on several times contrary to the Government Orders. While he is placing the difficulties being faced by him for non-extending the benefit of weekly off by the concerned authorities, he made attempt to demonstrate the said difficulties being faced by all the police personnel working in the Tamil Nadu police force. Because of the reason that the petitioner brought the difficulties of the police personnel being faced to the notice of this Court, it cannot be construed that he filed this writ petition in the way of Public Interest Litigation. In our view, while the petitioner is demonstrating his problems before this Court, he brought to the notice of this Court about the difficulties being faced by the other police personnel also. 13. This Court is very much conscious that in service issues, Public Interest Litigation is not maintainable. It is brought to the notice of the Court that admittedly, there is no Association for police personnel working in the Tamil Nadu State to enable them to represent their grievances to the State Government or to the concerned authorities. It is also an admitted fact that in neighbouring States, the police personnel are having their Associations. In such factual situation, the respondent cannot expect that every police personnel has to approach this Court by filing separate writ petition seeking to extend the benefit of weekly off provided by the State Government by amending the Police Standing Orders. 14. At this juncture, it is worthwhile to look into the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Govind Ram Purohi vs. Jagjiwan Chandra reported in 1999 SCC (L&S) 788. While dealing with a service matter, the Hon'ble Apex Court held in that judgment that there was no point in waiting for each and every person to file a petition. The relevant paragraph No.3 is extracted herein under: “3. It was lastly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that whereas the petition had been filed by only Respondent 1, the High Court while finally concluding the matter has given a direction to promote all those who were senior to the appellants even though they were not parties to the petition. It was lastly contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that whereas the petition had been filed by only Respondent 1, the High Court while finally concluding the matter has given a direction to promote all those who were senior to the appellants even though they were not parties to the petition. Once the High Court had placed a particular interpretation on the Rules, the benefit of that interpretation had to go to all those who qualified under the seniority-cum-merit rule. There was no point in waiting for each and every person to file a petition. Therefore, we do not see any reason why we should entertain such a technical plea when the High Court has done substantial justice to all concerned'' 15. Under these circumstances, by filing this writ petition, to bring the difficulties of the petitioner himself before this Court and at the same time his attempt to bring the difficulties of all the police personnel working in the State of Tamil Nadu to the notice of this Court cannot be faulted. 16. This Court can't ignore the facts of an incident brought to the notice of this Court by the petitioner that against one Mr.C.Kalaiyarasan, working as Constable (737) in Uthagai Traffic Police Station, Nilagiri District, disciplinary proceedings are initiated under Rule 24 of the Tamilnadu Police Subordinate Staff Conduct Rules, 1964, on the allegation that his wife on 18.11.2023 posted a text message in the Uthagai Traffic Police Station Whatsapp group for not being given weekly rest to her husband. Treating that the said message is posted to defame the police, the said police constable was punished by an order dated 21.05.2024 imposing the punishment of ''postponement of next increment for a period of two years, which shall operate to postpone his future increment and taken back for duty''. That instance itself proves how the respondent and his subordinate officers are implementing the Government Orders issued for compulsory weekly off to police personnel and how they are honouring the announcement made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State. 17. That instance itself proves how the respondent and his subordinate officers are implementing the Government Orders issued for compulsory weekly off to police personnel and how they are honouring the announcement made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister of the State. 17. The aim and object behind the announcement of the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu to grant weekly off to the Constable, Head Constable, Sub-Inspector Police and Special Sub- Inspector of Police working in the State police force is to take care of the health condition of them and it would be helpful for them to spend some time with the family members to come out from work tension and stress. Such decision of the Hon'ble Chief Minister is very much laudable. But, in practical, the Government Orders issued basing on the announcement of the Hon'ble Chief Minister are not being implemented effectively and properly. Due to the inaction of the respondent in ensuring the proper and effective implementation of the orders issued by the Government, the aim and object for amending Police Standing Orders for weekly off is being defeated and police personnel are not able to enjoy the fruits of the policy decision of the State Government. 18. Admittedly, the petitioner in the present writ petition is not seeking any relief against the orders issued by the State Government. He only seeks effective and proper implementation of the orders issued by the State Government to extend the benefit of weekly off to the police personnel. 19. Accordingly, in the considered opinion of this Court, the request made by the petitioner in this writ petition is just and reasonable and in accordance with law and as such, he is entitled for the relief sought. 20. In the result, this writ petition is allowed. 21. In view of the reasons and findings summed up above, this Court issues a Continuous Mandamus with the following directions to render substantial Justice: ''The respondent is directed to implement the Government Order in G.O.(Ms.)No. 469, Home (Police-IX) Department 03.11.2021 and to ensure proper and effective implementation of the said Government Order by concerned officers”. 22. It is absolutely made clear that in future, any violation of the above direction would necessarily invite initiation of proceedings against the officers concerned under the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India. There shall be no order as to costs. 22. It is absolutely made clear that in future, any violation of the above direction would necessarily invite initiation of proceedings against the officers concerned under the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 r/w Article 215 of the Constitution of India. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.