Dismissed

T.T.C.Cheran v. State of Tamilnadu

Madras HC1 Aug 2017WP/21688/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged disciplinary proceedings based on a charge memo, contending that Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act applied to oust jurisdiction. The court directed the petitioner to cooperate with the enquiry while allowing the petitioner to argue the non-applicability of the provision but dismissed the plea to quash the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to cooperate with day-to-day enquiry; plea to quash proceedings dismissed.

T.T.C.Cheran Vs State of Tamilnadu — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.08.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE MR.S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶5

W.P.No.21688 of 2003

¶6

and W.P.M.P.No.26908 of 2003

¶7

T.T.C.Cheran, President, Thiruvasi Village Panchayat, Thiruvasi Post, Thiruchirappalli District.

¶8

.. Petitioner

¶9

¶10

State of Tamil Nadu

¶11

Rep. by Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

Inspector of Panchayats cum The District Collector, Thiruchirappalli, Thiruchirappalli District. .. Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the second respondent in Na.Ka.A/2005/2003 dated 29.04.2003 signed by the second respondent on 30.04.2003 quash the same.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Selvaraj For Respondents : Mr.Akhil Akbar Ali

¶15

Government Advocate

¶16

The petitioner has come forward challenging the charge memo proceedings dated 29.04.2003 on the file of the second respondent and contended that Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994 will not be applicable to the facts and hence, the proceedings initiated are illegal.

¶17

The second respondent filed a detailed counter stating that the petitioner has committed serious misconduct and that the petitioner has submitted his explanation and that this Court granted an interim order of stay, dated 14.11.2003, pursuant to which, no proceedings had been initiated.

¶18

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

¶19

Even assuming that wrong provision has been quoted, that will not absolve the petitioner from the charges and hence, the petitioner has to participate in the proceedings as he is said to have committed a serious misconduct while holding the post. Section 205 will not be applicable and other provisions attracted are all the matters to be decided in a full-fledged enquiry. The petitioner has the benefit of interim order, thereby, the entire proceedings had been stopped. Hence, the petitioner, without prejudice in the matter, is directed to co-operate with the respondents to proceed with the enquiry in accordance with law and the respondents shall also taken into consideration the contention of the petitioner about the non-applicability of Section 205 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act, 1994. Enquiry has to be conducted on a day-to-day basis without adjourning the matter beyond three working days at any point of time. The petitioner's contention that the period in question has already expired, cannot be a ground to quash the proceedings as prayed for in this Writ Petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. W.P.M.P. is closed. -s/dAssistant Registrar(CCC) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar msm To 1. Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu Rural Development Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2. Inspector of Panchayats cum The District Collector, Thiruchirappalli, Thiruchirappalli District. +1 CC to Govt. Pleader sr 55754. W.P.No.21688 of 2003 SV(CO) sp(24/08/2017)

¶20

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

T.T.C.Cheran v. State of Tamilnadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.T.C.Cheran v. State of Tamilnadu

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

S.Srinivasan, Vs The District Collector

N.Mariappan Vs the Dist.Collector

V.S.Guruswamy, Vs State of Tamilnadu

T.Jayaraman Vs the Executive Engineer

R.Ramalingham Vs Special Commissioner and

Jayam Educational,Health and Vs State of Tamil Nadu Rep by