Disposed

P.Subramanian, v. The District Collector /

Madras HC16 Jul 2015WP/21328/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the petitioner's challenge to his suspension order. Instead of quashing the order, the court directed the District Collector to complete the pending disciplinary proceedings and pass a final order on merits within six months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the District Collector to complete disciplinary proceedings and pass final orders on merits within six months.

P.Subramanian, Vs The District Collector / — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 16.07.2015

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

¶5

W.P.No.21328 of 2015 and M.P.No.1 of 2015

¶6

P.Subramanian

¶7

... Petitioner
-Versus-
1.The District Collector /
Inspector of Panchayats,
Salem.
2.The Assistant Director of Rural
Development,[Panchayats],
Salem.
3.The Block Development Officer
[Village Panchayats],
Veerapandi,
Salem District.

¶8

...Respondents

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the relief of issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1^st respondent relating to the order in Pro.Na.Ka.No.13690/2014/Ni.3, dated 03.03.2015 and to quash the above said proceedings and for a consequential directions to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with consequential benefits.

¶10

The petitioner has been working as a Junior Assistant in the Office of the Panchayat Union at Veerapandi, Salem District. While so, the 1^st respondent by his order dated 03.03.2015 placed the petitioner under suspension under Rule 17(e) of The Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Challenging the above said order of suspension, the petitioner is now before this court.

¶11

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶12

I have heard Mr.M.Ravi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.M.E.Rani Selvam, the learned Additional Government Pleader who takes notice for the respondents 1 and 2 and Mr.Roofus Abraham, the learned Government Advocate, who takes notice for the 3^rd respondent and also perused the records carefully.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner, during the course of hearing of this writ petition, submitted that though the challenge is to the order of suspension, the petitioner would be satisfied, if a direction is issued to the respondents to expedite the disciplinary proceedings within a stipulated time.

¶14

In view of the above submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts and circumstances of the case, this court directs the 1^st respondent to complete the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.

¶15

Sd/-
Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
kmk
To
1.The District Collector / Inspector of Panchayats, Salem.
2.The Assistant Director of Rural Development,
[Panchayats], Salem.
3.The Block Development Officer [Village Panchayats],
Veerapandi, Salem District.

¶16

+1cc to Mr.M. Ravi, Advocate, S.R.No.36376 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.36414 TS(CO) EU(10/08/2015)

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

P.Subramanian, v. The District Collector /

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Subramanian, v. The District Collector /

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.Selvam Vs The Chairman

R.Pandi, Vs State of Tamilnadu

G.Anandavel Vs The State of Tamilnadu

S.Vinayagamoorthy, Vs State of Tamilnadu

V.Srinivasan @ v.Seeni Vs The Commissioner

M.Fazlur Rahman, Vs The Director of Animal