The court allowed a writ petition challenging a Home Guard's termination. Relying on the absence of an inquiry report in the termination order, the court quashed the order and remitted the matter for a proper inquiry.
Order of termination dated 15.06.2017 set aside; matter remitted for enquiry.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.11.2018
CORAM:
THE HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE S.VIMALA
W.P.No.21219 of 2018
and
W.M.P.Nos.24896 and 24897 of 2018
R.Arul ... Petitioner Vs. 1. Additional Director General of Police, Home Guards, Office of the Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. 2. Superintendent of Police, Ariyalur District, Ariyalur. .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the concerned records relating to the order No.Na.Ka.No.A1/2773/Ku.Pa.&U.Ka./2017 dated 07.12.2017 passed by the first respondent and the order dated 15.06.2017, made in Na.Ka.No.E3/9214/2017 passed by the 2nd respondent in so far as the petitioner is concerned and quash the same and consequently, direct the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner in services of Home Guards with all consequential monetary and other benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Gnanasekar
For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Thambidurai,
Special Govt. Pleader
O R D E R
The petitioner was appointed as a Home Guard in the Tamil Nadu Home Guards Organization at Ariyalur District, Ariyalur in the year 1998 and he was working without any complaint. It is the case of the petitioner that on 25.05.2017, he was not able
to attend Home Guard duty and therefore, he handed over his beat book to one Manikandan to get the signature of the superior officer concerned, but, the said Manikandan, without his knowledge signed the signature as that of the Inspector of Police, in his book. Therefore, the order of termination dated 15.06.2017 was passed by the second respondent. Challenging the said order of termination, the present writ petition has been filed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
ogy
To
Office of the Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004.
W.P.No.21219 of 2018
sr[co]
srg 02/01/2019
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an order of termination passed without recording an inquiry report can be sustained.
Whether a writ petition seeking quashing of such termination and reinstatement can be allowed.
What procedure should the authorities follow after quashing the termination order.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R. Arul
Additional Director General of Police, Home Guards, Office of the Director General of Police, Mylapore
Superintendent of Police, Ariyalur District
S. Vimala
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
