G.Bhas, v. The Chairman

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.03.2018

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA

W.P.No.5653 of 2018

G.Bhas .. Petitioner

-vs1. The Chairman TANGEDCO No.144, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002 2. The Chief Engineer/Distribution/Chennai South TANGEDCO No.144, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002 3. The Chief Engineer (Personnel) TANGEDCO 8^th Floor, No.144, Anna Salai Chennai 600 002 4. The Superintending Engineer/CEDC South TANGEDCO K.K.Nagar Chennai 600 078 .. Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the connected records in the impugned orders in suspension No.SE/CEDC/North/Adm.I/A.4/F Suspension/ D.No.003225/2013 dated 01.03.2013 of the Superintending Engineer CEDC/ North/Chennai-2 placing the petitioner under suspension with effect from 01.03.2013 Charge Memo No.PR No.138/Adm.I/A4/F.DP/2013 dated 19.04.2013; Ku.Aa.No.014539/P.R.138/Ni.Pi.1/U2/Ko.8(b) F.O./13-9 dated 31.03.2017; final order passed by the Superintending Engineer TANGEDCO/ South-1 and thereafter the last and the Appeal impugned order Ku.No.016478/PR.16/Mu.Ni.A/Aa Section/B.1/2017

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

dated 30.11.2017 of the 2^nd respondent (Chief Engineer) Distribution Chennai Region/South inasmuch as to the part portions para-6^th and 7^th (though it is not numbered) in the 2^nd and 3^rd page of orders dated 30.11.2017 i.e., “with regard to the Electricity Consumer's outstanding arrear amounts, there has been a case has been filed before the Consumer Court and since this case is pending trial, there cannot be any decision be taken or any consideration can be made thereon; but, however, in an appeal, it has been charge sheeted “that as the Section Officer concerned, there has been no proper re-set has been done in the Electric Monitor about the monthly consumption, but by the recording of the Electric Meter as default, and thereby, an average amount has been levied-thereof and the same has not been denied also; one Thiru G.Bhas, Asst. Engineer has failed to note down the Section Officer's failure to carry out the proper mentioning of E.B.Assessments monthly wise in the concerned LTCT connections and because the present revenue loss is under prosecution before concerned Hon'ble Court and by taking into consideration of the contents raised in the appeal petition and because of the Section Officer's failure to calculate the proper accounts of consumption, the punishment imposed by the Superintending Engineer/Chennai Electricity Distribution Circle/South-1 is found to be disproportionate” to the charge framed and quash (inasmuch as the allegation/averments made therein are not relevant to one another in other words one order with another order); consequently to direct the 3^rd respondent The Chief Engineer/Personnel appointing authority to treat the entire period of suspension as on duty for the purpose of full pay and allowances with all attendant benefits such as increments on the due date without any postponement and continuity of service, without any break in service and consequently to direct the 3^rd respondent to place the petitioner in the seniority list below Mrs.Logeswari, 30.07.1971 Kancheepuram EDC and above Mr.Mahesh Saminath.S (D.O.B. 15.04.1978), MTPS for promotion, seniority list since release.