Disposed

Immanuel Gnanasekaran .M v. The District Collector

Madras HC7 Sept 2022WP(MD)/21070/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a disciplinary order relieving the petitioner of his duty due to alleged teasing of a woman, the Court held that while the contention regarding the lack of enquiry was founded, the petitioner suffered no prejudice as he was immediately posted to the same rank elsewhere. The impugned order would not be res judicata against the petitioner, and no adverse action would b

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is not to be used against the petitioner adversely, and the petition is disposed of.

Immanuel Gnanasekaran .M Vs The District Collector — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.21070 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 07.09.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.21070 of 2022

¶7

and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.15303 and 15304 of 2022

¶8

M.Immanuel Gnanasekaran ... Petitioner

¶9

¶10

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶11

2.The Commissioner of Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, 5/1B, Vinayaga Nagar, K.K.Nagar, Madurai – 20. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the 2^nd Respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.01/A2/2022 dated 08.07.2022 and quash the same and consequently directing the 2^nd respondent to regulate the petitioner's service benefits with continuity of service, monetary benefits.

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

1/4

¶15

W.P(MD)No.21070 of 2022

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Raja

¶17

For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam, Spl. Government Pleader.

¶18

ORDER

¶19

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶20

2.The writ petitioner is employed as office assistant. When he was posted in the office of the second respondent, he allegedly teased a woman who was passing by. That led to the issuance of the impugned order. By the impugned order, the petitioner had been relived from his responsibility. Questioning the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶21

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order is stigmatic and that such an order could not have been passed without holding an enquiry. The said contention is well founded. However, the petitioner has not really suffered any prejudice. He has been posted in the very same rank in the office of Tahsildar, Madurai South. A copy of the order dated 19.07.2022 posting the writ petitioner as office assistant in the office of the Tashildar, Madurai South is now served on the learned counsel for the writ petitioner. It is for the writ petitioner to join in the transferred place https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶22

W.P(MD)No.21070 of 2022

¶23

immediately. The learned counsel for the petitioner would complaint that the transfer order was never served on him. Be that as it may, the order impugned in this writ petition will not be put against the writ petitioner. In other words, it will be treated as order simpliciter relieving him. Of course, if any criminal case is registered against the petitioner, then of course the hands of the authorities cannot be tied. I only clarify that based on the order impugned in this writ petition, no adverse action will be taken against the writ petitioner.

¶24

4.The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶25

07.09.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias Issue order copy on 08.09.2022.

¶26

To:

¶27

1.The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai.

¶28

2.The Commissioner of Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings,

¶29

5/1B, Vinayaga Nagar, K.K.Nagar, Madurai – 20.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

3/4

¶32

W.P(MD)No.21070 of 2022

¶33

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

¶34

ias

¶35

W.P(MD)No.21070 of 2022

¶36

07.09.2022

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/4

Immanuel Gnanasekaran .M v. The District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Immanuel Gnanasekaran .M 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Velu.K Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

Rajahs Higher Secondary School Vs The Chief Educational Officer

Sheela Devi.S Vs The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies

Uma.T Vs the Chief Manager

Dr. Ravi .O Vs The Director of Collegiate Education

The Secretary Vs the State of Tamil Nadu