Disposed

P.Manohar v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Madras HC24 Mar 2022WP/3767/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed respondents to appoint a fresh Enquiry Officer within one month and conclude the enquiry within four months, with final orders to follow within two months, due to a three-year delay in disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Direction to appoint fresh Enquiry Officer within one month, conclude enquiry within four months, and pass final orders within two months.

P.Manohar Vs The Principal Secretary to… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 24.03.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P.No.3767 of 2022

¶6

and WMP.No.3904 of 2022

P.Manohar

.. Petitioner

vs.

1.The Principal Secretary to Government,

¶11

Energy Department, Government of Tamil Nadu,

¶12

Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

¶13

2.The Chief Educational Inspector to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu – Electrical Inspectorate, Head Quarters, Thiru.Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

¶14

3.The Director,

¶15

The Directorate of Vigilance & Anti Corruption, No.293, MKN Road, Alandur, Chennai-600 016. .. Respondents

¶16

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to complete the disciplinary proceedings within a time limit fixed by this Court.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Namasivayam

¶18

For Respondents: Mr.M.Bindran,

¶19

Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶22

The prayer in the writ petition is for a Mandamus directing the respondents to complete the disciplinary proceedings within a time limit fixed by this Court.

¶23

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

¶24

When this Court posed a query to the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a time limit, the learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that the Enquiry Officer earlier appointed had voluntarily retired from service and therefore, Enquiry Officer to be appointed afresh and charges are framed under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules and seeks time to conclude the above said process.

¶25

Considering the fact that charges were framed against the petitioner on 31.10.2019, for which the petitioner has submitted his explanation on 11.11.2019 and as of now three years had lapsed without conducting any enquiry, this Court is of the view that the request made by the petitioner appears to be genuine and the disciplinary proceedings cannot allowed to be kept pending for long time as the same would cause great prejudice and hardship to the delinquent / petitioner.

¶26

Accordingly, this Court directs the respondents 1 and 2 to take necessary steps for appointment of fresh Enquiry Officer within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the Enquiry Officer shall conclude the enquiry, as early as possible, within a period of four months thereafter and based on the Enquiry Officer's Report, the Disciplinary Authority, after affording opportunity to the petitioner, shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of two months thereafter and communicate the decision taken, to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner also undertakes that the petitioner will extend their maximum cooperation for enquiry before the Enquiry Officer.

¶27

The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

Assistant Registrar(CS-V)

¶30

//True copy//

¶31

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶32

Jvm

¶33

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

¶34

¶35

1.The Principal Secretary to Government, Energy Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai-600 009.

¶36

2.The Chief Educational Inspector to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu – Electrical Inspectorate, Head Quarters, Thiru.Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032.

¶37

3.The Director,

¶38

The Directorate of Vigilance & Anti Corruption, No.293, MKN Road, Alandur,

¶39

Chennai-600 016.

¶40

+1cc to Mr.S.Namasivayam, Advocate SR.No.20108

¶41

+1cc to Government Pleader SR.No.20610

W.P.No.3767 of 2022

AD(CO)

GMY(06/04/2022)

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

P.Manohar v. The Principal Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Manohar v. The Principal Secretary to Government

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

R.Gopalakrishnan Vs The Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societes

B.Subashini Vs The Commissioner of Technical

M.Selvi Vs The Manager

Chennai yettrumathi Valaga Uzhiyargal Vs Government of tamil Nadu

A.R.Sakthivel Vs Directorate of Horticulture and plantation crops

S.Soosai Jayaraj Vs The Chief Educational officer