In a writ petition for reinstatement following suspension due to a pending criminal case, the High Court disposed of the matter as the relief sought had become infructuous since the petitioner aged out of service.
The writ petition was disposed of as the relief sought had become infructuous.
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.
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.11.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
V.Periyasamy ..Petitioner
vs.
1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri. ... Respondent
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the order passed in Roc No.2441/2011(A) dated 08.12.2011 and quash the same and further direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential, monetary and service benefits.
For Petitioner : Ms.N.Fidelia
For Respondents : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Raj Kumar, AGP
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the order passed
in Roc No.2441/2011(A) dated 08.12.2011, quash the same and consequently, direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with 1/7
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
all consequential, monetary and service benefits.
2.The facts, in brief, as per the affidavit and the documents enclosed to the Writ Petition, are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Village Administrative Officer, Namakkal Taluk and was transferred to Sankagiri Taluk in the year 1989. While so, a criminal case was registered against the petitioner in Cr.No.17/AC/2011 alleging that he had received illegal gratification and on account of which, the petitioner was placed under suspension as per the impugning proceedings in Roc No.2441/2011(A) dated 08.12.2011 under Rule 17(e) of Tamilnadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules etc. Even though the criminal case has been registered by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption, investigation has not been proceeded with and a final charge sheet has not been filed. The Department of Vigilance and Anti Corruption has been dragging the case without any progress.
3. The petitioner has been paid subsistence allowance from 2011 till
date, however, neither the suspension was revoked nor he was reinstated into the service. In a similar case, another Village Administration Officer
2/7
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
against whom also, a case has been registered by the Department of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption and placed him under suspension. However, later, it was revoked and he was transferred to other place and he has been continuing his work. The petitioner is aged 57 years and was going to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2014. Therefore, he came forward with the present Writ Petition, seeking to aside the order passed by the respondent vide proceedings in Roc No.2441/2011(A) dated 08.12.2011.
4. The respondent filed a detailed counter affidavit, wherein, it has
been stated as under:
3/7
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
5. Heard both sides and perused the documents placed on record.
6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was though suspended on 08.12.2011 by way of impugned order, the investigation has not been completed by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department and thereby, his suspension has not been revoked which put lot of hardship to the petitioner.
7. The petitioner is suspended only because a criminal case has been registered by the Department of Vigilance and Anti Corruption. Though it is mentioned in counter affidavit that investigation has already been completed, there is no record before this Court as on today i.e. (20.11.2023) to show as whether the Department of Vigilance and Anti Corruption has filed charge sheet against the petitioner. Leaving this aspect aside, the petitioner who was 57 years old as on the date of filing of the Writ Petition
4/7
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
itself.
in the year 2013 and he also reached age of superannuation on 30.06.2014 itself.
8. This Writ Petition has been filed with an intention to get immediate relief seeking for revocation of suspension so that he can work until his date of superannuation, which is 30.06.2014. He had attained the age of superannuation about 9 years ago. Even this Writ Petition is allowed, he will not get back into service. The petitioner should have filed a petition seeking to fix an early date for disposal of the Writ Petition soon after filing the Writ Petition. However, the petitioner has not taken any such steps and allowed it to be pending until this day. In any case, the relief sought for by the petitioner is very limited, i.e. seeking for revocation of suspension until his superannuation. Since the petitioner has already attained the age of superannuation long back, no further orders are required to be passed in this Writ Petition.
9.Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of as the relief sought for by the petitioner in this Petition has become infructuous. It is needless to
5/7
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
mention that the petitioner can work out his remedy in the manner known to
law. No costs.
20.11.2023
Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No dn To 1.The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri.
Dr.D. NAGARJUN, J
dn
6/7
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
Writ Petition No.26676 of 2013
20.11.2023
7/7
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition for reinstatement pending for over a decade should be allowed when the petitioner has already attained the age of superannuation.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
V. Periyasamy
The Revenue Divisional Officer, Sankagiri
D. NAGARJUN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
